The Trotsky Report -- suppressed by Weil

[Bob Morein]

An independent commission is required to investigate the Trotsky speaker
scandal, and the suppression of the report by Dave Weil, putative author,
whose duty it was to summarize his listening experience with Singh's "Idlyl
of a Rainy Afternoon."

Independent Ear Dave Weil mysteriously refuses to deliver the commissioned
report. Was he bought, bribed, suborned, or threatened?

Weil indicates the listening session ended quickly.

R.A.O. participants reactions vary from disappointment to moral outrage.

What is the Truth about Greg Singh's speakers?

Is it true they were designed on a napkin in a topless bar, or that they
were stuffed with napkins?

Are the Chinese drivers made from burned out Silkworm missile casing?

Weil said,
"I'll have something to say about the stufing later. In the meantime,
you can continue to play games all you want. But that's all they are
and I think it undermines the razor-thin credibility that you attempt
to maintain here with your pseudo-engineer crap. Me? I'll talk about
things I've actually heard."

It is clear that Weil lead us to believe that he would deliver a report
about Singh's speakers.
As a consequence of his default, we are left in the dark as to how quickly
these speakers destroy human hearing.

[dave weil]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:

>An independent commission is required to investigate the Trotsky speaker
>scandal, and the suppression of the report by Dave Weil, putative author,
>whose duty it was to summarize his listening experience with Singh's "Idlyl
>of a Rainy Afternoon."
>
>Independent Ear Dave Weil mysteriously refuses to deliver the commissioned
>report. Was he bought, bribed, suborned, or threatened?
>
>Weil indicates the listening session ended quickly.
>
>R.A.O. participants reactions vary from disappointment to moral outrage.
>
>What is the Truth about Greg Singh's speakers?
>
>Is it true they were designed on a napkin in a topless bar, or that they
>were stuffed with napkins?
>
>Are the Chinese drivers made from burned out Silkworm missile casing?
>
>Weil said,
>"I'll have something to say about the stufing later. In the meantime,
>you can continue to play games all you want. But that's all they are
>and I think it undermines the razor-thin credibility that you attempt
>to maintain here with your pseudo-engineer crap. Me? I'll talk about
>things I've actually heard."
>
>It is clear that Weil lead us to believe that he would deliver a report
>about Singh's speakers.
>As a consequence of his default, we are left in the dark as to how quickly
>these speakers destroy human hearing.

Yes, you *are* rather blind...

I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.

[dave weil]

On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 03:15:39 +0100, Langis > wrote:

>Bob, don't give up the day job.

Unfortunately, that *is* his day job.

Sad, isn't it?

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
>
[snip]
> Yes, you *are* rather blind...
>
> I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.
>
From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told that
you're a good listener, and fair.

All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

> An independent commission is required to investigate the Trotsky speaker
> scandal, and the suppression of the report by Dave Weil, putative author,
> whose duty it was to summarize his listening experience with Singh's
> "Idlyl
> of a Rainy Afternoon."
>
> Independent Ear Dave Weil mysteriously refuses to deliver the commissioned
> report. Was he bought, bribed, suborned, or threatened?
>
> Weil indicates the listening session ended quickly.
>
> R.A.O. participants reactions vary from disappointment to moral outrage.
>
> What is the Truth about Greg Singh's speakers?
>


Bob, serious question: do you think you're funny? Because from where
I'm sitting, that's one of several reasons why you're going to have an
awful lot of trouble selling a movie script.

>
>

[trotsky]

Bob Morein wrote:

> "dave weil" wrote in message
> ...
>
> >On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
> >
>
> [snip]
>
> >Yes, you *are* rather blind...
> >
> >I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.
> >
>
> From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
> that
> you're a good listener, and fair.
>
> All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.
>
>


Wow, Bob, you're playing dave like a fiddle. Except that you're tone
deaf, and badly in need of lessons. What I see in you is a junior
Krueger, sitting around in his underpants slobbering for attention.
It's not a pretty sight.

By the way, you might want to file both of those analogies under
"Examples of good writing."

[dave weil]

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 01:56:34 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>
>"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
>>
>[snip]
>> Yes, you *are* rather blind...
>>
>> I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.
>>
>From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told that
>you're a good listener, and fair.
>
>All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.

Isn't it fair for me to be allowed to finish my evaluation? Why should
I continue under these conditions? Why should I help someone who
questions my ability to conduct an evaluation? On the converse, I
don't think it's right to go the other way and hurt them either just
because I'm a bit annoyed with them.

Maybe i chose the wrong thing by posting my evaluations as they
unfolded instead of waiting and posting them all at the same time. The
problem was, I had other things going on that were taking up large
blocks of my time and it was taking longer than I had expected to find
the time to seriously evaluate them so, I wanted you guys not to have
to wait for the evaluation. I guess I did myself a disservice by
trying to give you folks timely information...Greg just couldn't wait
the the conclusion.

[Bob Morein]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 01:56:34 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"dave weil" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
> >>
> >[snip]
> >> Yes, you *are* rather blind...
> >>
> >> I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.
> >>
> >From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
that
> >you're a good listener, and fair.
> >
> >All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.
>
> Isn't it fair for me to be allowed to finish my evaluation? Why should
> I continue under these conditions?

In the above, you seem to complain that you're not being allowed to
continue, due to some "conditions."
But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
speakers back.


Why should I help someone who
> questions my ability to conduct an evaluation?

By this, I take it Greg questioned your ability to perform the evaluation.


On the converse, I
> don't think it's right to go the other way and hurt them either just
> because I'm a bit annoyed with them.
>
> Maybe i chose the wrong thing by posting my evaluations as they
> unfolded instead of waiting and posting them all at the same time. The
> problem was, I had other things going on that were taking up large
> blocks of my time and it was taking longer than I had expected to find
> the time to seriously evaluate them so, I wanted you guys not to have
> to wait for the evaluation. I guess I did myself a disservice by
> trying to give you folks timely information...Greg just couldn't wait
> the the conclusion.

I think you're saying this:

Greg wanted the speakers back before you could devote enough time to form a
complete opinion.
He questioned you ability to perform the evaluation.
If this is the case, it is a completely satisfactory answer.

[Michael Mckelvy]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Bob Morein wrote:
>
> > "dave weil" wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > >On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
> > >
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > >Yes, you *are* rather blind...
> > >
> > >I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.
> > >
> >
> > From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
> > that
> > you're a good listener, and fair.
> >
> > All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.
> >
> >
>
>
> Wow, Bob, you're playing dave like a fiddle. Except that you're tone
> deaf, and badly in need of lessons. What I see in you is a junior
> Krueger, sitting around in his underpants slobbering for attention.
> It's not a pretty sight.
>
Kinda like that picture of you tinkering in your garage next to the gsoline
can. Perhaps the fumes have done you some harm.

way, you might want to file both of those analogies under
> "Examples of good writing."
>

[Michael Mckelvy]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Bob Morein wrote:
>
> > An independent commission is required to investigate the Trotsky speaker
> > scandal, and the suppression of the report by Dave Weil, putative
author,
> > whose duty it was to summarize his listening experience with Singh's
> > "Idlyl
> > of a Rainy Afternoon."
> >
> > Independent Ear Dave Weil mysteriously refuses to deliver the
commissioned
> > report. Was he bought, bribed, suborned, or threatened?
> >
> > Weil indicates the listening session ended quickly.
> >
> > R.A.O. participants reactions vary from disappointment to moral outrage.
> >
> > What is the Truth about Greg Singh's speakers?
> >
>
>
> Bob, serious question: do you think you're funny? Because from where
> I'm sitting, that's one of several reasons why you're going to have an
> awful lot of trouble selling a movie script.
>
> >
> >
>
Greg, do you think you'er an engineer because you cna pay someone to design
a crossover for some cheap ass drivers?

From where I'm sitting that's why you're going to have an awful lot of
trouble selling speakers. :-(

[dave weil]

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
>speakers back.

No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
pick them up.

Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.

But what's new around here?

[dave weil]

On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
wrote:

>I think you're saying this:
>
>Greg wanted the speakers back before you could devote enough time to form a
>complete opinion.
>He questioned you ability to perform the evaluation.
>If this is the case, it is a completely satisfactory answer.

It is *not* the case.

But I don't feel like explaining to you YET again.

If you *really* want to know what happened, go back and review the
record.

[Arny Krueger]

"Langis" > wrote in message
...
>
> Bob, don't give up the day job.


Dormer, are you suggesting that you actually have a day job?

LOL!

[trotsky]

Michael Mckelvy wrote:
> "trotsky" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
>>Bob Morein wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"dave weil" wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>
>>>>Yes, you *are* rather blind...
>>>>
>>>>I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.
>>>>
>>>
>>>From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
>>>that
>>>you're a good listener, and fair.
>>>
>>>All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>Wow, Bob, you're playing dave like a fiddle. Except that you're tone
>>deaf, and badly in need of lessons. What I see in you is a junior
>>Krueger, sitting around in his underpants slobbering for attention.
>>It's not a pretty sight.
>>
>
> Kinda like that picture of you tinkering in your garage next to the gsoline
> can. Perhaps the fumes have done you some harm.



Sounds like you're just another Usenet loser afraid to show one iota of
self awareness, Bob. Am I close?

[trotsky]

Michael Mckelvy wrote:
> "trotsky" > wrote in message
> nk.net...
>
>>Bob Morein wrote:
>>
>>
>>>An independent commission is required to investigate the Trotsky speaker
>>>scandal, and the suppression of the report by Dave Weil, putative
>>
> author,
>
>>>whose duty it was to summarize his listening experience with Singh's
>>>"Idlyl
>>>of a Rainy Afternoon."
>>>
>>>Independent Ear Dave Weil mysteriously refuses to deliver the
>>
> commissioned
>
>>>report. Was he bought, bribed, suborned, or threatened?
>>>
>>>Weil indicates the listening session ended quickly.
>>>
>>>R.A.O. participants reactions vary from disappointment to moral outrage.
>>>
>>>What is the Truth about Greg Singh's speakers?
>>>
>>
>>
>>Bob, serious question: do you think you're funny? Because from where
>>I'm sitting, that's one of several reasons why you're going to have an
>>awful lot of trouble selling a movie script.
>>
>>
>>>
> Greg, do you think you'er an engineer because you cna pay someone to design
> a crossover for some cheap ass drivers?
>
> From where I'm sitting that's why you're going to have an awful lot of
> trouble selling speakers. :-(


We're talking about Bob now. Admit you're afraid to discuss the subject
and shut the **** up. TIA.

[trotsky]

dave weil wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
>>speakers back.
>
>
> No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
> pick them up.


Jeez, dave, why do you even give this loser the time of day? He's just
trying to push your buttons, and has no interest in what you really have
to say.

[dave weil]

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:10:29 GMT, trotsky > wrote:

>
>
>dave weil wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
>>>speakers back.
>>
>>
>> No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
>> pick them up.
>
>
>Jeez, dave, why do you even give this loser the time of day? He's just
>trying to push your buttons, and has no interest in what you really have
>to say.

He's not the only one.

[trotsky]

dave weil wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:10:29 GMT, trotsky > wrote:
>
>
>>
>>dave weil wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
>>>>speakers back.
>>>
>>>
>>>No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
>>>pick them up.
>>
>>
>>Jeez, dave, why do you even give this loser the time of day? He's just
>>trying to push your buttons, and has no interest in what you really have
>>to say.
>
>
> He's not the only one.



That sounds like a reference to me, which is completely disingenuous.
I've been on the level since the get go, and you have yet to refute a
single thing I've said.

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> I've been on the level since the get go, and you have yet to refute a
> single thing I've said.

Or maybe he has refuted them, but your ego or your insanity has
prevented you from admitting it.

[S888Wheel]

>
>Dormer, are you suggesting that you actually have a day job?
>

Arny, are you suggesting you have a day job? Tell us about the things you excel
at Arny. Oh yeah, nothing. How is your "day job?" Oh yeah, you don't have one.

[George M. Middius]

S888Wheel said:

> Arny, are you suggesting you have a day job? Tell us about the things you excel
> at Arny. Oh yeah, nothing. How is your "day job?" Oh yeah, you don't have one.

Unless you count his trafficking in kiddie porn, of course.

[dave weil]

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 15:53:00 GMT, trotsky > wrote:

>
>
>dave weil wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:10:29 GMT, trotsky > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>dave weil wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
>>>>>speakers back.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
>>>>pick them up.
>>>
>>>
>>>Jeez, dave, why do you even give this loser the time of day? He's just
>>>trying to push your buttons, and has no interest in what you really have
>>>to say.
>>
>>
>> He's not the only one.
>
>
>
>That sounds like a reference to me, which is completely disingenuous.
>I've been on the level since the get go, and you have yet to refute a
>single thing I've said.

Geez, Greg, you *are* perceptive.

Let me just relate a couple of instances of you not "paying
attention".

You said that you thought that my "third part" would only be talking
about specific music.

Here's what I wrote in my initial segment as far as how I invisioned
the process going:

"In part 2, I'll be talking about specific music and how I perceive
the speaker when playing those specific pieces. This has gone on too
long already. Hopefully I'll get this part sent by Tuesday at the
latest.

I wanted to get this out fairly quickly and I'm actually writing this
before I get the chance to compare with the Cornwalls and the
Allisons. That will come in part 3 later in the week. Who knows, I
might modify some of my impressions when I get the chance to do that.
The problem has been one of time for me. I've been working sort of day
on day off in the last week and I haven't been able to string a couple
of days off together until now".

Regardess of the numbering sequence, it was clear that there was going
to be basically three portions of the process. The first was a very
preliminary introduction to the speakers, without any idea that this
period would do anything other than giving me the first glimpse into
their character. There was a practical reason for this - it's that you
shipped the stands separately and I wasn't able to immediately set
them up to the standards that they would enjoy during the evaluation.
Actually, the Allisons were probably just as good as stands and I
probably could have just used them.

The second would be an extensive period of listening SOLELY to the
speakers, at which time I might draw on my years of listening to
numerous systems over the year, and the third period DIRECTLY
comparing in as close to real time as possible the Europas with two
speakers that I had in house.

I WAS VERY CLEAR that plugging the Cornwalls and the Allisons *might*
change what I had written previously.

Later, I wrote this modification of the initial segment:

> I also used the Fisher X202 tube integrated amp and I
>will mention it specifically when applicable.
>
>I also had available a pair of Klipsch Cornwalls, which are the
>speakers normally in this system and a pair of Allison CD8s from the
>bedroom. The Cornwalls are a 3 way large horn driven system with
>compression horn drivers for the midrange and tweeters and a 15 in.
>woofer in a large cabinet. Specs and graphs for the speakers can be
>found here:

Just to make things clear, this should probably be future tense. At
the time I started the review, I was going to write it as a single
review. It quickly became clear that a. my natural wordiness was
inflating the review to mammoth proportions (no editor you know) and
b. it was going to be a few more days before I could complete the
proceedings. So I've split the sessions up. I didn't bother to go back
and chage the tense of these verbs. None of this has actually happened
yet.

I made it CLEAR that I hadn't done a direct comparison yet.

As to the Merlin issue, let's REVISIT my comments about them:

"One revalatory experience for me listening to my Merlin EXP3s at my
previous address (in a much larger space of course) was playing Billie
Holliday's Song for Disingue Lovers (Classic Records). In that space
and on those speakers, Billie and her accompaniment was fully formed
and it REALLY did approach real "liveness" for me (an "in-the-room"
quality). There was an "electrostatic" quality coming out of those
rather large box speakers. Holliday's voice was at just about the
correct height and placed a little left and well forward of the drums.
All of the instrumentation seemed to be where it should without having
that "imaged" quality - they seemed to occupy a space, not a point.
Unfortunately, this isn't the case with the Europas. I have a feeling
that it's mainly influenced by the room - yet, I haven't seen this
much disparity with other things I have listened to. In the case of
the Europas, Holliday's voice appears to be coming directly out of the
left speaker. This has two problems - first, she's now a dwarf.
Second, your attention is drawn to the speaker instead of a
"disembodied" voice standing in free space. Another problem is that
she's further left than I remember. Other albums have kept the voices
closer to what I remember from other rooms, other systems (I'm
speaking especially of things that I've heard over a 10 - 20 year span
in as many as 10 different home listening rooms). I really don't know
why *this* album is so different. I'll have to listen to it again with
the Cornwalls to see if I get the same sort of displacement issues in
this room".

You wrote: You want to compare them to Merlins? That's fine too, if
you can put it in the context of relative size, price, and room
interaction from different rooms.

Except for price (which I've mentioned a few times on this forum, but
maybe I should have mentioned it again, but I think it's a minor
point), I *did* address all of those issues. I also mentioned the
possibility that it might be the room and not the speakers as I
addressed the possibility that I'd find the same issues with the
Cornwalls.

This is why I accuse you of not paying attention and not really
reading what I wrote and instead imposing your own agenda into the
process.

Yep, as long as I wasn't too critical, it was a GREAT review. Shame
you didn't wait until the end to find out whether some of the things
that I was speculating on were or weren't applicable...

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message
...
> >
> >Dormer, are you suggesting that you actually have a day job?

> Arny, are you suggesting you have a day job?

Tell us about your day job, sockpuppet Wheel. Mine is a matter of RAO
record.


>Tell us about the things you excel at Arny.

In short, fixing things that are broken.

> Oh yeah, nothing.

That's the story of your life, not mine.

> How is your "day job?" Oh yeah, you don't have one.

Tell us about your day job, sockpuppet Wheel.

[Michael Mckelvy]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Michael Mckelvy wrote:
> > "trotsky" > wrote in message
> > nk.net...
> >
> >>Bob Morein wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"dave weil" wrote in message
> ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 20:49:00 -0400, in rec.audio.opinion you wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>[snip]
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Yes, you *are* rather blind...
> >>>>
> >>>>I'm glad to see that you require my input though. Rather flattering.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>From what I've heard, there's no reason to discount it. I've been told
> >>>that
> >>>you're a good listener, and fair.
> >>>
> >>>All of which you've undermined by your unseemly silence.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>Wow, Bob, you're playing dave like a fiddle. Except that you're tone
> >>deaf, and badly in need of lessons. What I see in you is a junior
> >>Krueger, sitting around in his underpants slobbering for attention.
> >>It's not a pretty sight.
> >>
> >
> > Kinda like that picture of you tinkering in your garage next to the
gsoline
> > can. Perhaps the fumes have done you some harm.
>
>
>
> Sounds like you're just another Usenet loser afraid to show one iota of
> self awareness, Bob. Am I close?
>
Only if you are talking to yourself.

[Michael Mckelvy]

"trotsky" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Michael Mckelvy wrote:
> > "trotsky" > wrote in message
> > nk.net...
> >
> >>Bob Morein wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>An independent commission is required to investigate the Trotsky
speaker
> >>>scandal, and the suppression of the report by Dave Weil, putative
> >>
> > author,
> >
> >>>whose duty it was to summarize his listening experience with Singh's
> >>>"Idlyl
> >>>of a Rainy Afternoon."
> >>>
> >>>Independent Ear Dave Weil mysteriously refuses to deliver the
> >>
> > commissioned
> >
> >>>report. Was he bought, bribed, suborned, or threatened?
> >>>
> >>>Weil indicates the listening session ended quickly.
> >>>
> >>>R.A.O. participants reactions vary from disappointment to moral
outrage.
> >>>
> >>>What is the Truth about Greg Singh's speakers?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>Bob, serious question: do you think you're funny? Because from where
> >>I'm sitting, that's one of several reasons why you're going to have an
> >>awful lot of trouble selling a movie script.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> > Greg, do you think you'er an engineer because you cna pay someone to
design
> > a crossover for some cheap ass drivers?
> >
> > From where I'm sitting that's why you're going to have an awful lot of
> > trouble selling speakers. :-(
>
>
> We're talking about Bob now. Admit you're afraid to discuss the subject
> and shut the **** up. TIA.
>
You may be talking about him, I'm talking about you, a subject you seem ill
equipped to discuss, given your complete lack of awarness.

[Michael Mckelvy]

"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
> >speakers back.
>
> No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
> pick them up.
>
> Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
>
> But what's new around here?

Pot, meet kettle.

[Lionel]

dave weil wrote:

> Yep, as long as I wasn't too critical, it was a GREAT review. Shame
> you didn't wait until the end to find out whether some of the things
> that I was speculating on were or weren't applicable...
>
>
>
>

I will summarize Trotsky's speakers story like that :
Each time Trostsky called for subcontractors the job is correctly done :
- Web site.
- Photos.
- Speakers review. ;-)

The rest is subterfuge only...
Gregory Singh Jupiter Audio's president who manufactures speakers in his
kitchen.
In the end Jupiter is a good name, according to the giant planete
jupiter-audio hasn't any solid ground it's only some gaz, it's an
abortion, a non lighted abortive star.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Lionel wrote:


> The rest is subterfuge only...
> Gregory Singh Jupiter Audio's president who manufactures speakers in his
> kitchen.
> In the end Jupiter is a good name, according to the giant planete
> jupiter-audio hasn't any solid ground it's only some gaz, it's an
> abortion, a non lighted abortive star.
>

ie: tons of hot gas and no spark ;)

[Arny Krueger]

"Lionel" > wrote in message
...

> I will summarize Trotsky's speakers story like that :
> Each time Trotsky called for subcontractors the job is correctly done :
> - Web site.
> - Photos.
> - Speakers review. ;-)

An astute observation.

> The rest is subterfuge only...

Consider the source - Greg Singh.

[Arny Krueger]

"Michael Mckelvy" > wrote in message
...

> "trotsky" > wrote in message
> ...

> > Michael Mckelvy wrote:

> > > "trotsky" > wrote in message
> > > nk.net...

> > >>Bob Morein wrote:

> > > Greg, do you think you'er an engineer because you can pay someone to
design
> > > a crossover for some cheap ass drivers?

> > > From where I'm sitting that's why you're going to have an awful lot of
> > > trouble selling speakers. :-(

> > We're talking about Bob now. Admit you're afraid to discuss the subject
> > and shut the **** up. TIA.

> You may be talking about him, I'm talking about you, a subject you seem
ill
> equipped to discuss, given your complete lack of awareness.

Consider the consequences of Singh being suddenly afflicted with
self-awareness for the first time.

Not a pretty picture!

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
> "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
> ...
> >Tell us about the things you excel at Arny.
>
> In short, fixing things that are broken.
>

That is about the best you can hope for.






----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "S888Wheel" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >Tell us about the things you excel at Arny.
> >
> > In short, fixing things that are broken.
> >
>
> That is about the best you can hope for.

I see that you are still too much of a coward to tell us about your day job,
sockpuppet Yustabe.

Would the true facts about your "day job" expose you to ridicule?

[S888Wheel]

I said

>
>> Arny, are you suggesting you have a day job?

Arny said

>
>Tell us about your day job, sockpuppet Wheel. Mine is a matter of RAO
>record.

The record I see says that you are unemployed. That would mean you have no day
job. That would make you a hypocrite for attacking someone else for their
unemployment. are you really so simple that you need to have things spelled out
for you like this? Oh and yes, I am employed.


I said

>
>>Tell us about the things you excel at Arny.

Arny said

>
>In short, fixing things that are broken.

Yeah right. so you were lying when you said you excel at nothing and never
claimed to or is this a lie? Can you prove you excel at fixing anything Arny?
Can you prove that you are an outstanding handyman?

I said

>
>
>> Oh yeah, nothing.

Arny said

>
>That's the story of your life, not mine.
>

Prove it.

I said

>
>> How is your "day job?" Oh yeah, you don't have one.

Arny said

>
>Tell us about your day job, sockpuppet Wheel.
>

My job is great. It is also irrelevant to audio or my point which is that you
are a hypocrite. You don't have a day job. You are unemployed. That makes you a
hypocrite for attacking others for their lack of employment. Get It?

[trotsky]

George M. Middius wrote:
>
> trotsky said:
>
>
>>I've been on the level since the get go, and you have yet to refute a
>>single thing I've said.
>
>
> Or maybe he has refuted them, but your ego or your insanity has
> prevented you from admitting it.



I noticed that you didn't have a single counter for anything I said, either.

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> > Or maybe he has refuted them, but your ego or your insanity has
> > prevented you from admitting it.

> I noticed that you didn't have a single counter for anything I said, either.

I am resting my case now, with great gratitude, sweathog.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...

>
> I see that you are still too much of a coward to tell us about your day
job,
> sockpuppet Yustabe.
>
> Would the true facts about your "day job" expose you to ridicule?
>
>

Not at all.
But it is irrelevant to audio and it is none of your damn business.

I will tell you this, though. I work in an engineering office although
I am not an engineer. I earn very slightly less than an engineer with
similar management responsibilities. I run multiple projects of much
complexity. I manage consulants. My profession involves complex
issues within at least four other professional disciplines with which
I have a good workiing knowledge. I am very successful at what I do.
I save my employer lots of money.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[trotsky]

dave weil wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 15:53:00 GMT, trotsky > wrote:
>
>
>>
>>dave weil wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 12:10:29 GMT, trotsky > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>dave weil wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
>>>>>>speakers back.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
>>>>>pick them up.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Jeez, dave, why do you even give this loser the time of day? He's just
>>>>trying to push your buttons, and has no interest in what you really have
>>>>to say.
>>>
>>>
>>>He's not the only one.
>>
>>
>>
>>That sounds like a reference to me, which is completely disingenuous.
>>I've been on the level since the get go, and you have yet to refute a
>>single thing I've said.
>
>
> Geez, Greg, you *are* perceptive.
>
> Let me just relate a couple of instances of you not "paying
> attention".
>
> You said that you thought that my "third part" would only be talking
> about specific music.
>
> Here's what I wrote in my initial segment as far as how I invisioned
> the process going:
>
> "In part 2, I'll be talking about specific music and how I perceive
> the speaker when playing those specific pieces. This has gone on too
> long already. Hopefully I'll get this part sent by Tuesday at the
> latest.
>
> I wanted to get this out fairly quickly and I'm actually writing this
> before I get the chance to compare with the Cornwalls and the
> Allisons. That will come in part 3 later in the week. Who knows, I
> might modify some of my impressions when I get the chance to do that.
> The problem has been one of time for me. I've been working sort of day
> on day off in the last week and I haven't been able to string a couple
> of days off together until now".
>
> Regardess of the numbering sequence, it was clear that there was going
> to be basically three portions of the process.


And your beef to my responding after the third part was what, exactly?


The first was a very
> preliminary introduction to the speakers, without any idea that this
> period would do anything other than giving me the first glimpse into
> their character. There was a practical reason for this - it's that you
> shipped the stands separately and I wasn't able to immediately set
> them up to the standards that they would enjoy during the evaluation.
> Actually, the Allisons were probably just as good as stands and I
> probably could have just used them.
>
> The second would be an extensive period of listening SOLELY to the
> speakers, at which time I might draw on my years of listening to
> numerous systems over the year, and the third period DIRECTLY
> comparing in as close to real time as possible the Europas with two
> speakers that I had in house.
>
> I WAS VERY CLEAR that plugging the Cornwalls and the Allisons *might*
> change what I had written previously.
>
> Later, I wrote this modification of the initial segment:
>
>
>>I also used the Fisher X202 tube integrated amp and I
>>will mention it specifically when applicable.
>>
>>I also had available a pair of Klipsch Cornwalls, which are the
>>speakers normally in this system and a pair of Allison CD8s from the
>>bedroom. The Cornwalls are a 3 way large horn driven system with
>>compression horn drivers for the midrange and tweeters and a 15 in.
>>woofer in a large cabinet. Specs and graphs for the speakers can be
>>found here:
>
>
> Just to make things clear, this should probably be future tense. At
> the time I started the review, I was going to write it as a single
> review. It quickly became clear that a. my natural wordiness was
> inflating the review to mammoth proportions (no editor you know) and
> b. it was going to be a few more days before I could complete the
> proceedings. So I've split the sessions up. I didn't bother to go back
> and chage the tense of these verbs. None of this has actually happened
> yet.
>
> I made it CLEAR that I hadn't done a direct comparison yet.


You know, dave, I should give credit where credit is due: at least you
had some sort of game plan, but the language you used was still a problem.



> As to the Merlin issue, let's REVISIT my comments about them:
>
> "One revalatory experience for me listening to my Merlin EXP3s at my
> previous address (in a much larger space of course) was playing Billie
> Holliday's Song for Disingue Lovers (Classic Records). In that space
> and on those speakers, Billie and her accompaniment was fully formed
> and it REALLY did approach real "liveness" for me (an "in-the-room"
> quality). There was an "electrostatic" quality coming out of those
> rather large box speakers. Holliday's voice was at just about the
> correct height and placed a little left and well forward of the drums.
> All of the instrumentation seemed to be where it should without having
> that "imaged" quality - they seemed to occupy a space, not a point.
> Unfortunately, this isn't the case with the Europas. I have a feeling
> that it's mainly influenced by the room - yet, I haven't seen this
> much disparity with other things I have listened to. In the case of
> the Europas, Holliday's voice appears to be coming directly out of the
> left speaker. This has two problems - first, she's now a dwarf.
> Second, your attention is drawn to the speaker instead of a
> "disembodied" voice standing in free space. Another problem is that
> she's further left than I remember. Other albums have kept the voices
> closer to what I remember from other rooms, other systems (I'm
> speaking especially of things that I've heard over a 10 - 20 year span
> in as many as 10 different home listening rooms). I really don't know
> why *this* album is so different. I'll have to listen to it again with
> the Cornwalls to see if I get the same sort of displacement issues in
> this room".
>
> You wrote: You want to compare them to Merlins? That's fine too, if
> you can put it in the context of relative size, price, and room
> interaction from different rooms.
>
> Except for price (which I've mentioned a few times on this forum, but
> maybe I should have mentioned it again, but I think it's a minor
> point),


dave, let's just stop this charade. Calling the price of an audio
component a "minor point" shows how utterly, utterly, utterly clueless
you are about what's going on here, as also evidence by your thinking
that "lean bass" isn't a derogatory description, as also evidenced by
your thinking that only speakers covering the entire limits of human
hearing are neutral. I made a mistake, I'll admit it: I had no idea you
wouldn't even have a glimmer, a scintilla, of what the lexicon of audio
description are. There are certain words, terms, and concepts that are
taken as givens, and you seem to be privy to none of these. It doesn't
matter how sincere your efforts have been, the language simply isn't
there to give anything close to an idea of how the speakers sound.



I *did* address all of those issues. I also mentioned the
> possibility that it might be the room and not the speakers as I
> addressed the possibility that I'd find the same issues with the
> Cornwalls.
>
> This is why I accuse you of not paying attention and not really
> reading what I wrote and instead imposing your own agenda into the
> process.
>
> Yep, as long as I wasn't too critical, it was a GREAT review. Shame
> you didn't wait until the end to find out whether some of the things
> that I was speculating on were or weren't applicable...


dave, you're brain is running a little lean. And I mean that in a good way.

[dave weil]

On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 01:55:31 GMT, trotsky > wrote:

>dave, you're brain is running a little lean. And I mean that in a good way.

Well, at least it's not lapping over my belt.

I wish you all of the success that you deserve. And I mean that in the
way that you think.

[trotsky]

George M. Middius wrote:

>
> trotsky said:
>
>
> >>Or maybe he has refuted them, but your ego or your insanity has
> >>prevented you from admitting it.
>
>
>
> >I noticed that you didn't have a single counter for anything I said,
> either.
>
>
> I am resting my case now, with great gratitude, sweathog.



That much I believe. Fag.

[trotsky]

dave weil wrote:

> On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 01:55:31 GMT, trotsky wrote:
>
>
> >dave, you're brain is running a little lean. And I mean that in a
> good way.
>
>
> Well, at least it's not lapping over my belt.
>
> I wish you all of the success that you deserve. And I mean that in the
> way that you think.



That's fine--just let me know if you ever become mentally capable of
discussing the facts.

[George M. Middius]

trotsky said:

> > I wish you all of the success that you deserve. And I mean that in the
> > way that you think.

> That's fine--just let me know if you ever become mentally capable of
> discussing the facts.

Oh goody -- it's "facts" time again. Here are mine:

1. You, Gregipus the Mommy****er, are a dingleberry.

2. Krooger does not like you, but he admires you, and not in the way
you think.

3. In the future, you must have all questions cleared before you are
allowed to present them on RAO.

4. If you're not a crook, Lionella and her entourage will surround you
in a perfect circle, rain lotus blossoms and coffee grounds onto you,
and accept you as the Good Ol' Boy Savior of Audio. If you are a
crook, Jocasta will freeze you out.

5. There are no facts that are knowable by you because of your deep
and abiding profanity. Sorry.

[Lionel]

George M. Middius wrote:
>
> 4. If you're not a crook, Lionella and her entourage will surround you
> in a perfect circle, rain lotus blossoms and coffee grounds onto you,
> and accept you as the Good Ol' Boy Savior of Audio. If you are a
> crook, Jocasta will freeze you out.
>

You have a teenager perception and conception of the life, Georgetta !
Lionella already know that Greg "Spartacus" Trotsky is a crook. A real
stupid and pathetic one yes, but a crook.
Do you need an ultimate clue ? Ask to Dave Weil ! ;-)

LOL !

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>
>>
>> I see that you are still too much of a coward to tell us about your
>> day
> job,
>> sockpuppet Yustabe.

>> Would the true facts about your "day job" expose you to ridicule?

> Not at all.

Then why not be more forthcoming with the facts?

> But it is irrelevant to audio and it is none of your damn business.

Look Sockpuppet Wheel you started this line of discussion with me. If you
aren't man enough to end it honestly and like a man, then so be it.

> I will tell you this, though. I work in an engineering office although
> I am not an engineer.

OK so you're a clerk or a building maintenance person.

> I earn very slightly less than an engineer with
> similar management responsibilities.

Managment responsibilities and engineering are irrelevant. Having one tells
us zero about the other.

> I run multiple projects of much complexity.

With your demonstrated language skills, that's kinda hard to believe.

> I manage consulants.

I don't know what a "consulant" is.

> My profession involves complex
> issues within at least four other professional disciplines with which
> I have a good workiing knowledge.

Perhaps "complex" at some low technical and administrative level.

>I am very successful at what I do.

Prove it.

> I save my employer lots of money.

You'd probably save him more money if you didn't show up for work and your
employer was able to employ somebody that was more mentally competent. OTOH
sockpuppet Wheel, maybe you have some bottom-level position where functional
illiteracy and habitual fuzzy thinking aren't a problem.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

> I said
>
>>
>>> Arny, are you suggesting you have a day job?
>
> Arny said
>
>>
>> Tell us about your day job, sockpuppet Wheel. Mine is a matter of RAO
>> record.

> The record I see says that you are unemployed.

Prove it.

>That would mean you have no day job.

The phrase "Self employed" is meaningless to many people who can only
conceive of being wage slaves.

> That would make you a hypocrite for attacking
> someone else for their unemployment.

Nahh, the hypocrisy is yours sockpuppet Wheel. You tried to make a point
about my employment, but you continue to lack the guts it takes to talk
about your own.

>are you really so simple that
> you need to have things spelled out for you like this?

Anybody with a brain can read between the lines, sockpuppet Wheel. You're
like a guy who claims to be an expert baseball player, but who fumbles the
first and every ball thrown at him.

>Oh and yes, I am employed.

It's very clear that you aren't employed in a way that you are proud of,
sockpuppet Wheel.

[Lionel]

dave weil wrote:

> On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
>>speakers back.
>
>
> No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
> pick them up.
>
> Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
>
> But what's new around here?

Trotsky is preparing a 3-ways speaker...
Interested ?
:o)

[S888Wheel]

>Subject: Re: The Trotsky Report -- suppressed by Weil
>From: "Arny Krueger"
>Date: 10/6/03 6:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: >
>
>"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>
>>>
>>> I see that you are still too much of a coward to tell us about your
>>> day
>> job,
>>> sockpuppet Yustabe.
>
>>> Would the true facts about your "day job" expose you to ridicule?
>
>> Not at all.
>
>Then why not be more forthcoming with the facts?
>
>> But it is irrelevant to audio and it is none of your damn business.
>
>Look Sockpuppet Wheel you started this line of discussion with me. If you
>aren't man enough to end it honestly and like a man, then so be it.
>
>> I will tell you this, though. I work in an engineering office although
>> I am not an engineer.
>
>OK so you're a clerk or a building maintenance person.
>
>> I earn very slightly less than an engineer with
>> similar management responsibilities.
>
>Managment responsibilities and engineering are irrelevant. Having one tells
>us zero about the other.
>
>> I run multiple projects of much complexity.
>
>With your demonstrated language skills, that's kinda hard to believe.
>
>> I manage consulants.
>
>I don't know what a "consulant" is.
>
>> My profession involves complex
>> issues within at least four other professional disciplines with which
>> I have a good workiing knowledge.
>
>Perhaps "complex" at some low technical and administrative level.
>
>>I am very successful at what I do.
>
>Prove it.
>
>> I save my employer lots of money.
>
>You'd probably save him more money if you didn't show up for work and your
>employer was able to employ somebody that was more mentally competent. OTOH
>sockpuppet Wheel, maybe you have some bottom-level position where functional
>illiteracy and habitual fuzzy thinking aren't a problem.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

This is toooo funny. Once again Arny can't remember who he is talking to.

[S888Wheel]

>> I said
>>
>>>
>>>> Arny, are you suggesting you have a day job?

>
>> Arny said
>>
>>>
>>> Tell us about your day job, sockpuppet Wheel. Mine is a matter of RAO
>>> record.

I said

>
>> The record I see says that you are unemployed.
>

Arny said

>
>Prove it.

Asked and answered. Arny, do you know who you are talking to this time?

I said

>
>>That would mean you have no day job.


Arny said



>
>The phrase "Self employed" is meaningless to many people who can only
>conceive of being wage slaves.

And for some it's a way of delluding themsleves into thinking they are not
really unemployed. Prove you are self employed and actually running a business
and have an income.

I said

>
>> That would make you a hypocrite for attacking
>> someone else for their unemployment.
>

Arny said

>
>Nahh,

Denial noted.


Arny said

>the hypocrisy is yours sockpuppet Wheel.

Transference noted. A common element of denial.

Arny said

> You tried to make a point
>about my employment,

I didn't try to I did. More denial.


Arny said

>but you continue to lack the guts it takes to talk
>about your own.

Another feeble attempt at transfering your problems to others. Your denial is
painfully obvious as is your hypocrisy. Do you know who you are talking to this
time?

I said



>
>>are you really so simple that
>> you need to have things spelled out for you like this?

Arny said

>
>Anybody with a brain can read between the lines, sockpuppet Wheel.

Funny you can't even figure out who you are talking to at any given time. Talk
to us about reading between the lines when you can read the actual lines Arny.
Do you know who you are talking to this time?

Arny said

>You're
>like a guy who claims to be an expert baseball player, but who fumbles the
>first and every ball thrown at him.
>

Wow, that was an insightful analogy. Not. Again you must be able to read the
lines before you can read between them. Start by figuring out who you are
talking to.

I said

>
>>Oh and yes, I am employed.
>

Arny said

>
>It's very clear that you aren't employed in a way that you are proud of,
>sockpuppet Wheel.

Arny, when you can figure out who you are talking to at any given moment you
can then try to read between the lines. I have told you quite clearly that the
nature of my proffession is unrelated to audio and I think that bragging about
my professional acomplishments which are totally unrelated to audio would
simply be vulgar grandstanding. I think that sort of thing is completely
undignified. Do you know who you are talking too this time?

[Joseph Oberlander]

S888Wheel wrote:


>>The phrase "Self employed" is meaningless to many people who can only
>>conceive of being wage slaves.
>
>
> And for some it's a way of delluding themsleves into thinking they are not
> really unemployed. Prove you are self employed and actually running a business
> and have an income.

You do know that 40% of the U.S. population has some sort of personal business
ranging from selling Avon on the side to running a company, don't you?

That's tens of millions of people who are "self employed".

[S888Wheel]

>
>You do know that 40% of the U.S. population has some sort of personal
>business
>ranging from selling Avon on the side to running a company, don't you?

There are personal businesses and their are substantial personal businesses.
Any kid can open a lemonade stand and say they have a personal business.

>
>That's tens of millions of people who are "self employed".
>

I was only considering Arny's claim. Did you not get that?

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message


>> You do know that 40% of the U.S. population has some sort of personal
business
>> ranging from selling Avon on the side to running a company, don't you?

> There are personal businesses and their are substantial personal
> businesses.

Doooohhhhhhhh!

>Any kid can open a lemonade stand and say they have a personal business.

e.g. Greg Singh.

Tell us what you know and can support as being factual about my business,
sockpuppet Wheel. Oh, and BTW how long do you intend to play the coward and
continue to evade my questions about your alleged occupation?

[S888Wheel]

Arny said

>
>Tell us what you know and can support as being factual about my business,
>sockpuppet Wheel.

You have offered no evidence that you have a valid income producing personal
business. Looks like a lemonade stand to me until you offer any evidence that
your business is generating any substantial income.

Arny said

> Oh, and BTW how long do you intend to play the coward and
>continue to evade my questions about your alleged occupation?

How long will it take you to understand my answers to your questions regarding
my occupation? Clearly you haven't understood them yet if you think fear is my
motive.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
>
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> "Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >>>
> >>> "Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
> >>> ...
> >
> >>
> >> I see that you are still too much of a coward to tell us about your
> >> day
> > job,
> >> sockpuppet Yustabe.
>
> >> Would the true facts about your "day job" expose you to ridicule?
>
> > Not at all.
>
> Then why not be more forthcoming with the facts?
>

Because I like it that you are dying to find out,
and that I am not going to tell you!

> > But it is irrelevant to audio and it is none of your damn business.
>
> Look Sockpuppet Wheel you started this line of discussion with me. If you
> aren't man enough to end it honestly and like a man, then so be it.
>

Ahem, Arny, you are losing it again. You are talking to
Sockpuppet Yustabe, not to Wheel.
At any rate, I didn't start the line of discussion about my
career. It was 'YOU' who started that.
Arny lies again.


> > I will tell you this, though. I work in an engineering office although
> > I am not an engineer.
>
> OK so you're a clerk or a building maintenance person.
>

If that's want you want to believe. That presumption is
inconsistent with the rest of my description.

> > I earn very slightly less than an engineer with
> > similar management responsibilities.
>
> Managment responsibilities and engineering are irrelevant. Having one
tells
> us zero about the other.
>
> > I run multiple projects of much complexity.
>
> With your demonstrated language skills, that's kinda hard to believe.
>

My language skills are very good. My typing skills are not.

> > I manage consulants.
>
> I don't know what a "consulant" is.
>

You could guess. 'At least' I give you credit for not being
that stupid. If you think it is to your advantage to act like
an idiot, so be it. You really aren't impressing anyone.
Quite the opposite, you just demean yourself.

> > My profession involves complex
> > issues within at least four other professional disciplines with which
> > I have a good workiing knowledge.
>
> Perhaps "complex" at some low technical and administrative level.
>

Perhaps not!

> >I am very successful at what I do.
>
> Prove it.
>

I do, every day that I work.
But I have no intention of proving anything to you.

> > I save my employer lots of money.
>
> You'd probably save him more money if you didn't show up for work and your
> employer was able to employ somebody that was more mentally competent.
OTOH
> sockpuppet Wheel, maybe you have some bottom-level position where
functional
> illiteracy and habitual fuzzy thinking aren't a problem.
>

Ahem, Arny, I am Sockpuppet Yustabe.
You are a complete idiot.
You are even too stupid to clean the toilets in my building.





----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
.net...
> S888Wheel wrote:
>
>
> >>The phrase "Self employed" is meaningless to many people who can only
> >>conceive of being wage slaves.
> >
> >
> > And for some it's a way of delluding themsleves into thinking they are
not
> > really unemployed. Prove you are self employed and actually running a
business
> > and have an income.
>
> You do know that 40% of the U.S. population has some sort of personal
business
> ranging from selling Avon on the side to running a company, don't you?
>
> That's tens of millions of people who are "self employed".
>

You forgot to include drug dealers and child pornographers.
They are self employed, too.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

> Arny said

>> Oh, and BTW how long do you intend to play the coward and
>> continue to evade my questions about your alleged occupation?

> How long will it take you to understand my answers to your questions
> regarding my occupation?

No answers from you. just evasions.

> Clearly you haven't understood them yet if you think fear is my motive.

Clearly, you are talking trash, which is your usual mode.

It's quite clear that you fear the consequences of telling the truth about
yourself.

[George M. Middius]

Sockpuppet Yustabe said:

> Because I like it that you are dying to find out,
> and that I am not going to tell you!

The ironic thing is that you have told us. The whole group, I mean.
And on more than one occasion.

[S888Wheel]

Arny said

>
>>> Oh, and BTW how long do you intend to play the coward and
>>> continue to evade my questions about your alleged occupation?
>

I said

>
>> How long will it take you to understand my answers to your questions
>> regarding my occupation?
>

Arny said

>
>No answers from you. just evasions.
>

Arny, I have given you my answer to this question. I do not talk about my
occupation or my acomplishements in my occupation because my occupation is
unrelated to audio and I find bragging about my acomplishments, which are
unrelated to audio, would be nothing more than vulgar grnadstanding. The
concept seems simple enough to me. Why can't you grasp it? If you weren't
making hypocritical personal attacks on others for their occupations nad
acomplishments in life I wouldn't be pointing out your miserable failings in
such matters. I do so only to show your hypocisy. Tell us the reason you want
to know my occupation Arny? Is it genuine curiosity or are you just looking for
another angle to spew your sociopathic attacks on people just because yo cannot
support your religious beliefs in audio with legitimate arguments?

I said

>
>> Clearly you haven't understood them yet if you think fear is my motive.

Arny said

>
>Clearly, you are talking trash, which is your usual mode.
>

This comming from a guy who makes libelous false accusationsof pedophilia when
he looses a debate. Hupocisy rears it's ugly head again.

Arny said

>
>It's quite clear that you fear the consequences of telling the truth about
>yourself.

It is quite clear that you are looking for a new angle to make sociopathic
personal attacks to compensate for your inability to defend your religious
beliefs in audio via a fair and honest debate. Arny, it is obvious that what
ever I do in life you will try to find some way to attack it because you are so
full of mallice. Regardless of what I have acomplished in life you will try to
twist facts or deny them. So there obviously is no point in telling you
anything about myself.

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message

> Sockpuppet Yustabe said:
>
>> Because I like it that you are dying to find out,
>> and that I am not going to tell you!
>
> The ironic thing is that you have told us. The whole group, I mean.

If that's true, someone can post the google URL of said post.

> And on more than one occasion.

Yeah sure Middius, and you've said in the past you've told the whole group
your occupation as well.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

> Arny said
>
>>
>>>> Oh, and BTW how long do you intend to play the coward and
>>>> continue to evade my questions about your alleged occupation?
>>
>
> I said
>
>>
>>> How long will it take you to understand my answers to your questions
>>> regarding my occupation?
>>
>
> Arny said
>
>>
>> No answers from you. just evasions.

> Arny, I have given you my answer to this question.

Which is no answer, IOW the answer of a coward.

> I do not talk
> about my occupation or my acomplishements in my occupation because my
> occupation is unrelated to audio and I find bragging about my
> acomplishments, which are unrelated to audio, would be nothing more
> than vulgar grnadstanding.

As if you aren't among the more vulgar people around here! LOL!

>The concept seems simple enough to me. Why
> can't you grasp it?

Because it's typical of your abject cowardice and dissembling, sockpuppet
Wheel.

> If you weren't making hypocritical personal
> attacks on others for their occupations nad acomplishments in life I
> wouldn't be pointing out your miserable failings in such matters.

One problem sockpuppet Wheel, the so-called failings are figments of your
imagination

> I do so only to show your hypocisy.

LOL!

> Tell us the reason you want to know my occupation Arny?

To quote a doddering fool, I do so only to show your hypocrisy.

> Is it genuine curiosity or are you just looking
> for another angle to spew your sociopathic attacks on people just
> because yo cannot support your religious beliefs in audio with
> legitimate arguments?

To quote a doddering fool, I do so only to show your hypocrisy.

<snip the usual delusional personal attacks we get from sockpuppet wheel>

[Joseph Oberlander]

Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:


> You forgot to include drug dealers and child pornographers.
> They are self employed, too.

That figure is compiled by our government and does not include
illegal businesses.

[S888Wheel]

>> Arny said
>>
>>>
>>>>> Oh, and BTW how long do you intend to play the coward and
>>>>> continue to evade my questions about your alleged occupation?

>
>> I said
>>
>>>
>>>> How long will it take you to understand my answers to your questions
>>>> regarding my occupation?
>>>

>
>> Arny said
>>
>>>
>>> No answers from you. just evasions.
>

I said

>
>> Arny, I have given you my answer to this question.
>

Arny said

>
>Which is no answer, IOW the answer of a coward.

No, the answer of someone who doesn't like to brag. I guess this is difficult
to understand for you given your chronic problem with being an underachiever.

I said

>
>> I do not talk
>> about my occupation or my acomplishements in my occupation because my
>> occupation is unrelated to audio and I find bragging about my
>> acomplishments, which are unrelated to audio, would be nothing more
>> than vulgar grnadstanding.

Arny said

>
>As if you aren't among the more vulgar people around here! LOL!
>

This comming from a guy who makes false accusations of pedophilia.

I said

>
>>The concept seems simple enough to me. Why
>> can't you grasp it?
>

Arny said

>
>Because it's typical of your abject cowardice and dissembling, sockpuppet
>Wheel.

IOW no you can't grasp it.

I said

>
>> If you weren't making hypocritical personal
>> attacks on others for their occupations nad acomplishments in life I
>> wouldn't be pointing out your miserable failings in such matters.

Arny said

>
>One problem sockpuppet Wheel, the so-called failings are figments of your
>imagination

No Arny, they are your own admissions. Are you so out of touch with reality
that you forget what you have said in those rare moments of selfawareness?

I said

>
>> I do so only to show your hypocisy.
>

Arny said

>
>LOL!

Good answer.

I said

>
>> Tell us the reason you want to know my occupation Arny?

Arny said

>
>To quote a doddering fool, I do so only to show your hypocrisy.

Can't even come up with an original thought in trying to avoid the obvious.

I said

>
>> Is it genuine curiosity or are you just looking
>> for another angle to spew your sociopathic attacks on people just
>> because yo cannot support your religious beliefs in audio with
>> legitimate arguments?
>

Arny said

>
>To quote a doddering fool, I do so only to show your hypocrisy.
>

Unoriginal and redundant. Can't give a straight answer can you? You are pegged
and looking for a way out now.

Arny said
>
><snip the usual delusional personal attacks we get from sockpuppet wheel>
>

You mean this?
It is quite clear that you are looking for a new angle to make sociopathic
personal attacks to compensate for your inability to defend your religious
beliefs in audio via a fair and honest debate. Arny, it is obvious that what
ever I do in life you will try to find some way to attack it because you are so
full of mallice. Regardless of what I have acomplished in life you will try to
twist facts or deny them. So there obviously is no point in telling you
anything about myself.

I guess sometimes the truth does get to you.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Sockpuppet Yustabe said:
>
> > Because I like it that you are dying to find out,
> > and that I am not going to tell you!
>
> The ironic thing is that you have told us. The whole group, I mean.
> And on more than one occasion.
>
>

You just sent Arny off on another one of his crazed google
searches. That ought to keep him quiet for half an hour.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
k.net...
> Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>
>
> > You forgot to include drug dealers and child pornographers.
> > They are self employed, too.
>
> That figure is compiled by our government and does not include
> illegal businesses.
>


....such as fraudulently posing as a competent computer technician.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Joseph Oberlander]

Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:

> "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>
>>Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>You forgot to include drug dealers and child pornographers.
>>>They are self employed, too.
>>
>>That figure is compiled by our government and does not include
>>illegal businesses.
>>
>
>
>
> ...such as fraudulently posing as a competent computer technician.

Computers aren't rocket science, you know. I have no doubt that
Arny does a decent job at fixing computers. He seems to be
making a profit off of it, which is always the acid-test for
service-oriented businesses.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message



>> <snip the usual delusional personal attacks we get from sockpuppet
>> wheel>

> You mean this?

> It is quite clear that you are looking for a new angle to make
> sociopathic personal attacks to compensate for your inability to
> defend your religious beliefs in audio via a fair and honest debate.

Yawn. This is one of the biggest lies you've posted yet, if its not just
delusional blather. I've nailed you so many times in moderated debate over
on RAHE that my fingers get numb when I think about it.

> Arny, it is obvious that what ever I do in life you will try to find
> some way to attack it because you are so full of mallice.

In an ideal world people like you would see audio for what it is - a
technology, a business, a impersonal art and science. There is no inherent
malice in discussing audio as a technology, a business, an art or a science.
I'd be perfectly happy to discuss it that way for a very long time if the
discussion was productive. However sockpuppet Wheel, numskulls like you
quickly run out of intellectual gas in discussions like these, and that's
when the malice you feel because you've been deconstructed so often comes
into play.

> Regardless of what I have acomplished in life you will try to twist facts
or
> deny them.

That's one of your major problems sockpuppet Wheel, you don't even know what
the relevant facts are, and when I try to explain them to you at your
limited technical level, you think I'm making the true facts up.

>So there obviously is no point in telling you anything about myself.

Yet you've tried to twist what you know about me into any number of hateful
fantasies.

> I guess sometimes the truth does get to you.

I'd like to see you grow enough of a brain to recognize the truth when you
see it. You came into this scene with your head full of lies, and you've
never been able to shake them off.

[Arny Krueger]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
k.net
> Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>
>> "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
>> k.net...
>>
>>> Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:

>>>> You forgot to include drug dealers and child pornographers.
>>>> They are self employed, too.

>>> That figure is compiled by our government and does not include
>>> illegal businesses.

>> ...such as fraudulently posing as a competent computer technician.

> Computers aren't rocket science, you know.

Well, building and repairing PCs isn't rocket science. The underlying
technology is exactly rocket science. It just that it's to the point where
it is packaged this well...

>I have no doubt that
> Arny does a decent job at fixing computers. He seems to be
> making a profit off of it, which is always the acid-test for
> service-oriented businesses.

My business has always been profitable, but it's been a lot of hard work
with a mediocre return on effort and investment.

But thanks for trying to straighten sockpuppet Yustabe out. Mission
Impossible.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
k.net...
> Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>
> > "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
> > k.net...
> >
> >>Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>You forgot to include drug dealers and child pornographers.
> >>>They are self employed, too.
> >>
> >>That figure is compiled by our government and does not include
> >>illegal businesses.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ...such as fraudulently posing as a competent computer technician.
>
> Computers aren't rocket science, you know. I have no doubt that
> Arny does a decent job at fixing computers. He seems to be
> making a profit off of it, which is always the acid-test for
> service-oriented businesses.
>

I doubt that Arny does a decent job.
I doubt that he makes a decent profit.
I doubt that he has much business.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Lionel]

Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
> "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
> k.net...
>
>>Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
k.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>You forgot to include drug dealers and child pornographers.
>>>>>They are self employed, too.
>>>>
>>>>That figure is compiled by our government and does not include
>>>>illegal businesses.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>...such as fraudulently posing as a competent computer technician.
>>
>>Computers aren't rocket science, you know. I have no doubt that
>>Arny does a decent job at fixing computers. He seems to be
>>making a profit off of it, which is always the acid-test for
>>service-oriented businesses.
>>
>
>
> I doubt that Arny does a decent job.
> I doubt that he makes a decent profit.
> I doubt that he has much business.
>
>
What about your job "Madame Pipi" ?

[Arny Krueger]

"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message


> I doubt that Arny does a decent job.
> I doubt that he makes a decent profit.
> I doubt that he has much business.

Amusingly enough, this is explicit admission from sockpuppet Yustabe that he
really knows nothing about any of these things. That makes all his former
strong claims about them look like lies, doesn't it?

It's really nice when your opponents disembowel themselves in public like
this!

My day: already made once. Let's see who else in their clique can match or
exceed sockpuppet Yustabe's performance of the day.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 09:42:15 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>"Sockpuppet Yustabe" > wrote in message

>
>> I doubt that Arny does a decent job.
>> I doubt that he makes a decent profit.
>> I doubt that he has much business.
>
>Amusingly enough, this is explicit admission from sockpuppet Yustabe that he
>really knows nothing about any of these things. That makes all his former
>strong claims about them look like lies, doesn't it?
>
>It's really nice when your opponents disembowel themselves in public like
>this!
>
>My day: already made once. Let's see who else in their clique can match or
>exceed sockpuppet Yustabe's performance of the day.

Well, you've already supported all three of these statements today.

So, it makes Art look pretty smart.

[S888Wheel]

I said

>>> <snip the usual delusional personal attacks we get from sockpuppet
>>> wheel>
>

>
>> You mean this?
>

>
>> It is quite clear that you are looking for a new angle to make
>> sociopathic personal attacks to compensate for your inability to
>> defend your religious beliefs in audio via a fair and honest debate.
>

arny said

>
>Yawn. This is one of the biggest lies you've posted yet, if its not just
>delusional blather. I've nailed you so many times in moderated debate over
>on RAHE that my fingers get numb when I think about it.

In your fantasy world perhaps.

I said

>
>> Arny, it is obvious that what ever I do in life you will try to find
>> some way to attack it because you are so full of mallice.

Arny said

>
>In an ideal world people like you would see audio for what it is - a
>technology, a business, a impersonal art and science.

I see audio for what it is. Thankfully your idea of an ideal world is not
enforced on the rest of us.


Arny said

> There is no inherent
>malice in discussing audio as a technology, a business, an art or a science.

Not until you start loosing an argument. then you start spewing personal
attacks. Eventually you turn everyone of your unsuccessful debates on audio
into a discusting mud slinging contest.


Arny said

>
>I'd be perfectly happy to discuss it that way for a very long time if the
>discussion was productive.

Balony. You jump into attack mode right from the start much of the time.

Arny said

>However sockpuppet Wheel, numskulls like you
>quickly run out of intellectual gas in discussions like these, and that's
>when the malice you feel because you've been deconstructed so often comes
>into play.

Arny, why don't you just say "I'm rubber and you're glue..." Since all you are
doing is repeting what I said about you.

I said

>
>> Regardless of what I have acomplished in life you will try to twist facts
>or
>> deny them.
>

Arny said

>
>That's one of your major problems sockpuppet Wheel, you don't even know what
>the relevant facts are, and when I try to explain them to you at your
>limited technical level, you think I'm making the true facts up.

What does this lie have to do with what i said? Are you no longer aware of what
point you are responding to? Before you didn't even know who you were
responding to.

I said

>
>>So there obviously is no point in telling you anything about myself.
>

Arny said

>
>Yet you've tried to twist what you know about me into any number of hateful
>fantasies.

Nope. i have only illustrated your hypocrisy when you attack others for what
they have done in their lives by reminding you of your own admissions of being
quite unexceptional in this world.


I said

>
>
>> I guess sometimes the truth does get to you.
>

Arny said

>
>I'd like to see you grow enough of a brain to recognize the truth when you
>see it.

I see it Arny. You are a bitter chronic underachiever who tries to tear others
down to compensate for your own shortcommings in life and in audio. Your
mallice drives you to do things like calling people pedophiles when you cannot
win a straight up debate on audio.

Arny said

>You came into this scene with your head full of lies, and you've
>never been able to shake them off.
>

You continue to dellude yourself. Oh check the mail carefully this week. You
have a summons on the way. I bet you get it in the next two days. Yes it will
have my name, the same one I have been telling you is my name, the same name
you have claimed was a lie and part of some conspiracy against you. it will
also have my address and phone number. i guess that might bust your dellusional
claims that i am homeless. of course you can claim the summons is a fake. that
would be really dellusional but not surprising from you. By the way please
behave with some civility if you can. No harassing calls and no pipe bombs in
the mail.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message


> You continue to dellude yourself. Oh check the mail carefully this
> week. You have a summons on the way. I bet you get it in the next two
> days. Yes it will have my name, the same one I have been telling you
> is my name,

Talk is cheap. Just because you tell me you're Albert Einstein or Joe Blow,
I'm supposed to take it seriously?

LOL!

>the same name you have claimed was a lie and part of some
> conspiracy against you.

This is just another one of your many delusions or lies (who can tell
which?), sockpuppet Wheel.

>it will also have my address and phone number.

Interesting irrelevant trivia at best.

> i guess that might bust your dellusional claims that i am homeless.

"Dellusional" - claims typed into a Dell computer?

LOL!

Oh, talk is cheap.

> of course you can claim the summons is a fake.

Depends if it passes the usual logical and legal tests.

> that would be really dellusional but not surprising from you.

We shall see what we shall see.

> By the way please
> behave with some civility if you can. No harassing calls and no pipe
> bombs in the mail.

Given that figurative pipe bombs in the mail are something you're now
bragging about sockpuppet Wheel, I can see why you expect them of me. No,
I'll pursue my legal recourse against you, as promised.

[dave weil]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 12:10:07 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>Given that figurative pipe bombs in the mail are something you're now
>bragging about sockpuppet Wheel, I can see why you expect them of me. No,
>I'll pursue my legal recourse against you, as promised.

Talk is cheap.

[S888Wheel]

I said

>
>> You continue to dellude yourself. Oh check the mail carefully this
>> week. You have a summons on the way. I bet you get it in the next two
>> days. Yes it will have my name, the same one I have been telling you
>> is my name,

Arny said

>
>Talk is cheap.

That includes your talk Arny. A fact that seems to be lost on you. A summons
OTOH is not talk.

Arny said

> Just because you tell me you're Albert Einstein or Joe Blow,
>I'm supposed to take it seriously?
>

I told you I am Scott Wheeler. You will see that on the summons when it comes
in the mail. It is up to you whether or not you want to take a lawsuit
seriously.

I said

>
>>the same name you have claimed was a lie and part of some
>> conspiracy against you.

Arny said

>
>This is just another one of your many delusions or lies (who can tell
>which?), sockpuppet Wheel.

Denial of the facts noted.

I said

>
>>it will also have my address and phone number.

Arny said

>
>Interesting irrelevant trivia at best.
>

Right. You used that as an acid test before. I guess you forgot about your rant
over a return address. So were you full of crap then or now? Both I suspect.

I said



>
>> i guess that might bust your dellusional claims that i am homeless.

Arny said

>
>"Dellusional" - claims typed into a Dell computer?
>
>LOL!
>
>Oh, talk is cheap.

Is this another rare moment of selfawareness Arny? Are you realizing that you
are all talk? Let's see how your talk works in court.

I said

>
>> of course you can claim the summons is a fake.

Arny said

>
>Depends if it passes the usual logical and legal tests.

As if you were capable of making any such determination.

I said

>
>> that would be really dellusional but not surprising from you.

Arny said

>
>We shall see what we shall see.
>

No. you shall see. I already know.

I said

>
>> By the way please
>> behave with some civility if you can. No harassing calls and no pipe
>> bombs in the mail.

Arny said

>
>Given that figurative pipe bombs in the mail are something you're now
>bragging about sockpuppet Wheel, I can see why you expect them of me.

Oh, you equate a legal action to an illegal one. I guess I should worry. you
have no idea what is right and wrong or legal and illegal.

Arny said

>No,
>I'll pursue my legal recourse against you, as promised.
>

Oh, you mean taking a default judgement and then bugging the postmaster about
getting mail? Go for it!

[Lionel]

S888Wheel wrote:

[snip]

Mr. S888Wheel,

Your insistence to discuss with Mr. Krueger make me think that you
already know that you haven't enough material in your file to seriously
sue Mr. Krueger.
You know that he is highly irritable and all the exchanges you have with
him now look like as many provocations.

Lionel Chapuis

[Joseph Oberlander]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
> k.net
>
>>Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
k.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
>
>
>>>>>You forgot to include drug dealers and child pornographers.
>>>>>They are self employed, too.
>
>
>>>>That figure is compiled by our government and does not include
>>>>illegal businesses.
>
>
>>>...such as fraudulently posing as a competent computer technician.
>
>
>>Computers aren't rocket science, you know.
>
>
> Well, building and repairing PCs isn't rocket science. The underlying
> technology is exactly rocket science. It just that it's to the point where
> it is packaged this well...

Perhaps that's the difference. I also grew up when you had to make
your computer out of a kit. I remember aligning floppy drives manually
and soldering new caps onto a board as normal repairs.

Now, it's all replace and forget. Nice, actually, due to the cost and
time savings, but the newer people in the field don't know how to do
the technical stuff when they have to.

Unfortunately, accoustics requires either:
1: technical knowledge that nobody on this group possesses. Engineering
and physics degrees and such. These are the people who build concert
halls and do the real speaker and electronics design. They can make a
deign from scratch and it works perfectly the first time, every time.

2:Testing and trail and error based upon rough extimates. That's the
rest of us. Build acoustic chambers, test designs, tweak with the
cabinets, and so on. Even the big companies do this in-house, as
the number of people who are truly in the #1 category are probably
less than a couple dozen in the entire world. Tend of thousands think
and wish they were, though.

>
>>I have no doubt that
>>Arny does a decent job at fixing computers. He seems to be
>>making a profit off of it, which is always the acid-test for
>>service-oriented businesses.
>
>
> My business has always been profitable, but it's been a lot of hard work
> with a mediocre return on effort and investment.
>
> But thanks for trying to straighten sockpuppet Yustabe out. Mission
> Impossible.

I wonder what Greg's customer referral rate will be? Lol.

[Arny Krueger]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
ink.net
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>> "Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
>> k.net
>>

>>> Computers aren't rocket science, you know.

>> Well, building and repairing PCs isn't rocket science. The underlying
>> technology is exactly rocket science. It just that it's to the point
>> where it is packaged this well...

> Perhaps that's the difference. I also grew up when you had to make
> your computer out of a kit. I remember aligning floppy drives
> manually and soldering new caps onto a board as normal repairs.

> Now, it's all replace and forget.

Right, when floppy drives wholesaled for $300 you had one *world* and when
they wholesale for $6 you have another.

>Nice, actually, due to the cost and
> time savings, but the newer people in the field don't know how to do
> the technical stuff when they have to.

What changed is the level of underlying complexity.

> Unfortunately, acoustics requires either:

> 1: technical knowledge that nobody on this group possesses.
> Engineering and physics degrees and such.

In its former incarnation the group had people who were clearly
well-qualified speaker designers, people like Kantor, Dunlavy etc.

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=921R5.431164%24i5.7427591%40news1.frmt 1.sf
ba.home.com

http://www.google.com/groups?&selm=%23d3ncW7f%23GA.388%40nih2naab.prod2.comp
userve.com


> These are the people who build concert halls and do the real speaker and
electronics design.
> They can make a deign from scratch and it works perfectly the first time,
every time.

Nope. There's still a lot of tweaking by instrument and ear of initial
loudspeaker designs, and perfection in speakers is still elusive.

> 2:Testing and trail and error based upon rough extimates. That's the
> rest of us.

Speak for yourself!

> Build acoustic chambers, test designs, tweak with the
> cabinets, and so on.

That still happens, regardless of the skill that goes into the initial
design.

> Even the big companies do this in-house, as
> the number of people who are truly in the #1 category are probably
> less than a couple dozen in the entire world.

They number exactly zero.

> Tend of thousands think and wish they were, though.

The unwashed do it all, sometimes for months and years, and still end up
with substandard results.

>>> I have no doubt that
>>> Arny does a decent job at fixing computers. He seems to be
>>> making a profit off of it, which is always the acid-test for
>>> service-oriented businesses.

>> My business has always been profitable, but it's been a lot of hard
>> work with a mediocre return on effort and investment.

>> But thanks for trying to straighten sockpuppet Yustabe out. Mission
>> Impossible.

> I wonder what Greg's customer referral rate will be? Lol.

When I made my "stick a fork in it" comment early last month I was totally
serious. Everything that's happened since then was just the denouement.

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=JTednfe5f_GiQcCiXTWJiQ%40comcast.com

[Joseph Oberlander]

Arny Krueger wrote:


> Right, when floppy drives wholesaled for $300 you had one *world* and when
> they wholesale for $6 you have another.

But knowing how and why they work is good knowledge. When I was starting
in the firld a decade or more ago, techs could tell what was wrong with
a hard drive or power supply by the sound it was making.

Now, nobody cares or knows. - replace and forget.

Still, if I was making speakers, knowing how they work would be vital
knowledge, at least IMO.

> What changed is the level of underlying complexity.

True. Still, you adjust. Surface mount technology isn't THAT hard to
analyze and repair.

>>Unfortunately, acoustics requires either:
>
>>1: technical knowledge that nobody on this group possesses.
>>Engineering and physics degrees and such.
>
> In its former incarnation the group had people who were clearly
> well-qualified speaker designers, people like Kantor, Dunlavy etc.

Nice links :)

>>They can make a deign from scratch and it works perfectly the first time,
>
> every time.
>
> Nope. There's still a lot of tweaking by instrument and ear of initial
> loudspeaker designs, and perfection in speakers is still elusive.

Well, you know what I mean - it's damn good and only needs refinement.
Definately a league unto themselves. Trotsky thinking he's in the same
class is actually amusing.

>>2:Testing and trail and error based upon rough extimates. That's the
>>rest of us.
>
>
> Speak for yourself!
>
>
>> Build acoustic chambers, test designs, tweak with the
>>cabinets, and so on.
>
> That still happens, regardless of the skill that goes into the initial
> design.

Sure. My point is that even the pros do it and double-check their
work with real tools. Real infrastructure.

Greg's approach is a joke. Has he even DONE any analysis of a finished
product?

Here - check out this link:
http://www.tomshardware.com/howto/20031006/index.html

*300* steps to make a OEM quality case. People don't even realize
how much time and effort goes into things like speakers and computer
cases. Sure, you get the soft-tooled POS junk that's done in 20
steps at the other end, but most of the industry works like this.

A whole other realm than Trotsky works at.

>>>But thanks for trying to straighten sockpuppet Yustabe out. Mission
>>>Impossible.
>
>>I wonder what Greg's customer referral rate will be? Lol.
>
> When I made my "stick a fork in it" comment early last month I was totally
> serious. Everything that's happened since then was just the denouement.
>
> http://www.google.com/groups?selm=JTednfe5f_GiQcCiXTWJiQ%40comcast.com
>
>

[Arny Krueger]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
ink.net

> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> Right, when floppy drives wholesaled for $300 you had one *world*
>> and when they wholesale for $6 you have another.

> But knowing how and why they work is good knowledge. When I was
> starting in the field a decade or more ago, techs could tell what was
> wrong with a hard drive or power supply by the sound it was making.
>
> Now, nobody cares or knows. - replace and forget.
>
> Still, if I was making speakers, knowing how they work would be vital
> knowledge, at least IMO.
>
>> What changed is the level of underlying complexity.
>
> True. Still, you adjust. Surface mount technology isn't THAT hard to
> analyze and repair.

My point is that mentally, people optimally analyze and manipulate on a
field with a certain of number of tokens. In order to be effective with a
complex system, the number of tokens has to remain about the same, so each
token has to represent a greater level of complexity. At some point you
forget about individual resistors and capacitors and start working in terms
of circuit boards. For more complex systems you forget about circuit boards
and each token is a box with a level of complexity like a PC.

>>> Unfortunately, acoustics requires either:

>>> 1: technical knowledge that nobody on this group possesses.
>>> Engineering and physics degrees and such.

>> In its former incarnation the group had people who were clearly
>> well-qualified speaker designers, people like Kantor, Dunlavy etc.

> Nice links :)

I was there, those were far better days for RAO. Trolls like Middius and
Weil intentionally ran these people off. Notice Weil's comment about
"submissives"? Very revealing! I'm not surprised about the content, I'm
surprised he actually said it.

>>> They can make a deign from scratch and it works perfectly the first
>>> time,

>> every time.

>> Nope. There's still a lot of tweaking by instrument and ear of
>> initial loudspeaker designs, and perfection in speakers is still
>> elusive.

> Well, you know what I mean - it's damn good and only needs refinement.
> Definitely a league unto themselves. Trotsky thinking he's in the same
> class is actually amusing.

Yeah, compare and contrast Greg Singh to Ken Kantor.

LOL!

>>> 2:Testing and trail and error based upon rough estimates. That's
>>> the rest of us.

>> Speak for yourself!

>>> Build acoustic chambers, test designs, tweak with the
>>> cabinets, and so on.

>> That still happens, regardless of the skill that goes into the
>> initial design.

> Sure. My point is that even the pros do it and double-check their
> work with real tools. Real infrastructure.

Agreed. They do more than check, it's still an iterative process.

> Greg's approach is a joke. Has he even DONE any analysis of a
> finished product?

Well he says he listened to it in at least one room with at least one
recording and I believe that.

> Here - check out this link:
> http://www.tomshardware.com/howto/20031006/index.html

Check out a car plant - we have a few of them around here!

> *300* steps to make a OEM quality case.

Since sheet metal/plastic products are a big business where I live, there is
nothing in that article that surprises me in the least. Not one tool I
haven't touched, not one machine I haven't seen, heard, touched, and
smelled, not one operation I haven't done myself from grinding dies to
putting product in cardboard boxes.

> People don't even realize
> how much time and effort goes into things like speakers and computer
> cases. Sure, you get the soft-tooled POS junk that's done in 20
> steps at the other end, but most of the industry works like this.

There's a lot more than 300 steps in a car door, not counting the work in
the individual components like the switches and motors.

> A whole other realm than Trotsky works at.

Right.

>>>> But thanks for trying to straighten sockpuppet Yustabe out. Mission
>>>> Impossible.

>>> I wonder what Greg's customer referral rate will be? Lol.

>> When I made my "stick a fork in it" comment early last month I was
>> totally serious. Everything that's happened since then was just the
>> denouement.
>
>> http://www.google.com/groups?selm=JTednfe5f_GiQcCiXTWJiQ%40comcast.com

[Joseph Oberlander]

Arny Krueger wrote:


>>*300* steps to make a OEM quality case.
>
> Since sheet metal/plastic products are a big business where I live, there is
> nothing in that article that surprises me in the least. Not one tool I
> haven't touched, not one machine I haven't seen, heard, touched, and
> smelled, not one operation I haven't done myself from grinding dies to
> putting product in cardboard boxes.

What amazes me is for all of those steps, they still sell the cases for
as low as $50.(power supply not included at that price). As near as I can
tell, for instance, they make the cases for Antec, Dell, Gateway, and
probably many of the tower type designs you see from other major OEM
companies.

>
>>People don't even realize
>>how much time and effort goes into things like speakers and computer
>>cases. Sure, you get the soft-tooled POS junk that's done in 20
>>steps at the other end, but most of the industry works like this.
>
> There's a lot more than 300 steps in a car door, not counting the work in
> the individual components like the switches and motors.

And still, you can buy a (80's technology - acceptable, but not great)
little KIA or Hyundai for $8000 out the door. Yeah, they suck almost
as much as the VW Fox did(what a dreadful car!), but it still is an
amazing amount of parts and work involved.

>>A whole other realm than Trotsky works at.

I wonder how many steps a typical large manufacturer has for its speakers?
Probably at least 50 if they outsource the drivers and cabinets. If
they make everything, probably on the order of 200+.

[Arny Krueger]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
nk.net

> Arny Krueger wrote:

>>> *300* steps to make a OEM quality case.

>> Since sheet metal/plastic products are a big business where I live,
>> there is nothing in that article that surprises me in the least. Not
>> one tool I haven't touched, not one machine I haven't seen, heard,
>> touched, and smelled, not one operation I haven't done myself from
>> grinding dies to putting product in cardboard boxes.

> What amazes me is for all of those steps, they still sell the cases
> for as low as $50.(power supply not included at that price).

That's with a retail markup. If one stoops low enough one can find cases for
under $30 retail, with a power supply. you can't nothing off-the-shelf that
even vaguely compares to the complexity and performance of a PC power supply
for under $100 in a regular electronics catalog. Maybe make that $200.

> As near
> as I can tell, for instance, they make the cases for Antec, Dell,
> Gateway, and probably many of the tower type designs you see from
> other major OEM companies.

I'm under the impression that Dell and Gateway have their cases made
domestically, or at least near where the PC is assembled.

When I assemble a PC, I spend a modest amount of time tearing the case down,
if you catch my drift.

Many cases look to me like they were designed to be assembled during the
assembly of the rest of the PC. The assembly of he rest of the PC is often
facilitated by having the plastic front panel removed. Why put it on before
final assembly? Ditto for the sides of the case. Many cases have a tray for
the system board. Why put it into the case until the motherboard is
attached?

Also remember that the actual process of physically building the PC is
heavily outsourced. At times I've seen nearly-identical machines from Dell
and Micron for example, but under the covers they both looked like they were
actually built by Intel.

>>> People don't even realize
>>> how much time and effort goes into things like speakers and computer
>>> cases. Sure, you get the soft-tooled POS junk that's done in 20
>>> steps at the other end, but most of the industry works like this.

Read the article closely, soft-tooling is for high end, low volume cases.

>> There's a lot more than 300 steps in a car door, not counting the
>> work in the individual components like the switches and motors.

> And still, you can buy a (80's technology - acceptable, but not great)
> little KIA or Hyundai for $8000 out the door. Yeah, they suck almost
> as much as the VW Fox did(what a dreadful car!), but it still is an
> amazing amount of parts and work involved.

Raw steel and plastic don't cost that much. Labor is still a big part of the
out-the-door cost.

>>> A whole other realm than Trotsky works at.

> I wonder how many steps a typical large manufacturer has for its
> speakers?

That's going to depend on so many things.

>Probably at least 50 if they outsource the drivers and cabinets.

Well, almost everybody outsources the drivers. Even if they come from within
the same corporation, the drivers are almost always made in a different
factory. I wouldn't want a driver that was assembled in the same place as
speaker cabinets or systems.

> If they make everything, probably on the order of 200+.

I suspect there's a couple of hundred operations in a single driver,
depending on how you count. I've been in driver plants, I should do a mental
count. It's lots, and again there's an issue related to subassemblies. For
example, voice coil assemblies are often outsourced.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Arny Krueger wrote:

> Many cases look to me like they were designed to be assembled during the
> assembly of the rest of the PC. The assembly of he rest of the PC is often
> facilitated by having the plastic front panel removed. Why put it on before
> final assembly? Ditto for the sides of the case. Many cases have a tray for
> the system board. Why put it into the case until the motherboard is
> attached?
>
> Also remember that the actual process of physically building the PC is
> heavily outsourced. At times I've seen nearly-identical machines from Dell
> and Micron for example, but under the covers they both looked like they were
> actually built by Intel.

I know that the InWin and Antec cases are made by that chinese firm - the
photos gave enough away. As for the OEMs, some probably do make them
in-house as cheaply as possible.

>>I wonder how many steps a typical large manufacturer has for its
>>speakers?

> I suspect there's a couple of hundred operations in a single driver,
> depending on how you count. I've been in driver plants, I should do a mental
> count. It's lots, and again there's an issue related to subassemblies. For
> example, voice coil assemblies are often outsourced.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Langis wrote:

> Joseph Oberlander > wrote:
>
>
>>And still, you can buy a (80's technology - acceptable, but not great)
>>little KIA or Hyundai for $8000 out the door. Yeah, they suck almost
>>as much as the VW Fox did(what a dreadful car!), but it still is an
>>amazing amount of parts and work involved.
>
>
> The Fox is a 70's car, originally released in 1973 IIRC. For some
> reason resurrected in the late 80's for the American market.

Note that I didn;t say any year for the Fox, merely that it sucked.

On a crap scale, Yugo of course is at the bottom, then the Hyundai Excel
and VW Fox nearly tied for second place.

[Arny Krueger]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
nk.net

> Arny Krueger wrote:

>> Many cases look to me like they were designed to be assembled during
>> the assembly of the rest of the PC. The assembly of he rest of the
>> PC is often facilitated by having the plastic front panel removed.
>> Why put it on before final assembly? Ditto for the sides of the
>> case. Many cases have a tray for the system board. Why put it into
>> the case until the motherboard is attached?

>> Also remember that the actual process of physically building the PC
>> is heavily outsourced. At times I've seen nearly-identical machines
>> from Dell and Micron for example, but under the covers they both
>> looked like they were actually built by Intel.

I seriously doubt that Intel actually cuts, bends, and paints metal for
their own cases.

> I know that the InWin and Antec cases are made by that chinese firm -
> the photos gave enough away.

It's not a sure bet that *all* InWin and/or Antec cases are made there. I
don't know for sure, but I suspect that Antec in particular, shops around. I
think some of this can be discerned by looking at pricing. IME Antec is
relatively high-priced for the quality. I suspect this is partially due to a
long chain of transactions leading up to the point of sale.

>As for the OEMs, some probably do make them in-house as cheaply as
possible.

I doubt they cut, bend and paint their own metal.

A lot of the sales of PCs from well-known OEMs like Dell, IBM, Micron etc,
is assembled by somebody else, from parts from somebody else again, even the
cases.

The car business is going the same route.

Everybody seems to like to design and market, but actually getting one's
hands dirty can really suck! Also final assembly is generally a relatively
clean operation compared to the nitty-gritty processing of rawer materials
like coils of steel.

Ironically, even those (small by Detroit standards) coils of steel that are
shown at Tom's Hardware are themselves processed from larger coils that
come from the basic mill.

The coils of steel that come from the mill are something like 8 feet in
diameter and maybe 6 feet wide. Put about 8-10 of them on a flatbed truck,
get a GVW of 200,000 pounds or more, and roll them over Detroit's freeways
until the cracks appear and then roll them some more!

There are shops that do nothing but cut mill steel down into the relatively
small rolls shown in
http://www6.tomshardware.com/howto/20031006/case_factory-09.html .

So you take the panel off the side of a PC. Dell sold it to you. Supplier A
assembled it. Supplier B cut, bent, and painted it. Supplier C cut down the
mill steel to a size that supplier B could handle. Supplier D actually made
the steel. If the steel came from overseas, supplier C' imported it from
supplier D and warehoused it until C needed it. If supply and demand are out
of synch, and/or one or more of the players is too small, there are
additional brokers and suppliers involved.

[Arny Krueger]

"Joseph Oberlander" > wrote in message
ink.net
> Langis wrote:

>> Joseph Oberlander > wrote:

>>> And still, you can buy a (80's technology - acceptable, but not
>>> great) little KIA or Hyundai for $8000 out the door. Yeah, they
>>> suck almost as much as the VW Fox did(what a dreadful car!), but it
>>> still is an amazing amount of parts and work involved.

>> The Fox is a 70's car, originally released in 1973 IIRC. For some
>> reason resurrected in the late 80's for the American market.

> Note that I didn't say any year for the Fox, merely that it sucked.

It was a very radical car (especially for VW as the Dasher) when first
released. Many innovations, again particularly for VW. One major innovation
was that it had a ton less parts in it than the Beetle. At the time VW was
losing their butts over labor costs, partially due to expensive labor, but
also due to the extremely high labor content of some of the products they
sold.

Here's a nice summary:

http://www.gpab.net/jerrys_audi/

I lived in Europe in the late 60's, so I was familiar with some of the cars
mentioned there that may be unfamiliar in the US.

When I worked for Chrysler, we looked at the Fox very heavily when we were
designing the L-car (Omni/Horizon) and the K-car. I seem to recall that the
Omni/Horizon actually used the VW engine in its early days.

> On a crap scale, Yugo of course is at the bottom, then the Hyundai
> Excel and VW Fox nearly tied for second place.

I think that you need to judge cars in the context of the times when they
were actually newly-introduced commercial products.

The Yugo and Hyundai products very much suffer from the fact that they were
basically old designs when they were new products for the then-current
producers.

Of course, the fact that the Yugo was an old Fiat design for a deadly cheap
car didn't help it much, either! OTOH, you should have seen what passed for
a car in Italy when the Fiat 128 came out! It was quite deluxe! LOL!

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
>
> When I worked for Chrysler, we looked at the Fox very heavily when we were
> designing the L-car (Omni/Horizon) and the K-car. I seem to recall that
the
> Omni/Horizon actually used the VW engine in its early days.
>

The Horizon/Omni is Arny's legacy car!




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[S888Wheel]

Arny said

>
>>Given that figurative pipe bombs in the mail are something you're now
>>bragging about sockpuppet Wheel, I can see why you expect them of me. No,
>>I'll pursue my legal recourse against you, as promised.

Well Arny, you've had the summons for a day now. So are you going to lay down
and wait for a default judgement and bug the postmaster as you "promised?"

Arny said

>
>Talk is cheap.
>

Indeed, and your silence speaks volumes. I guess you finally got it. I bet that
old offer to settle things with a retraction and an apology looks pretty good
in hind sight. Your move now Arny.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

> Arny said
>
>>
>>> Given that figurative pipe bombs in the mail are something you're
>>> now bragging about sockpuppet Wheel, I can see why you expect them
>>> of me. No, I'll pursue my legal recourse against you, as promised.
>
> Well Arny, you've had the summons for a day now. So are you going to
> lay down and wait for a default judgement and bug the postmaster as
> you "promised?"

Why would I bug the postmaster?

[Joseph Oberlander]

Arny Krueger wrote:

>>On a crap scale, Yugo of course is at the bottom, then the Hyundai
>>Excel and VW Fox nearly tied for second place.
>
>
> I think that you need to judge cars in the context of the times when they
> were actually newly-introduced commercial products.

True. Still, the Fox and Excel were merely adequate, even then.

Okay - I found a car worse than the Yugo. LeCar. I don't think
I'll have any problem putting it in last place. Dreadful car,
even back when it was made.

> The Yugo and Hyundai products very much suffer from the fact that they were
> basically old designs when they were new products for the then-current
> producers.

Of course. Much like Hyundai and Kia use older 80's and 90's designs.
OTOH, there's nothing intrinsicaly wrong with the older designs anyways,

> Of course, the fact that the Yugo was an old Fiat design for a deadly cheap
> car didn't help it much, either! OTOH, you should have seen what passed for
> a car in Italy when the Fiat 128 came out! It was quite deluxe! LOL!

Fiat and Renault anways made - odd cars. Heh.

[Lionel]

Joseph Oberlander wrote:

> Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>>> On a crap scale, Yugo of course is at the bottom, then the Hyundai
>>> Excel and VW Fox nearly tied for second place.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think that you need to judge cars in the context of the times when they
>> were actually newly-introduced commercial products.
>
>
> True. Still, the Fox and Excel were merely adequate, even then.
>
> Okay - I found a car worse than the Yugo. LeCar. I don't think
> I'll have any problem putting it in last place. Dreadful car,
> even back when it was made.
>
Hola Joe !
You cannot compare LeCar with the Yugo or you haven't drive any of them.

> Fiat and Renault anways made - odd cars. Heh.
>

Yes but... interesting market shares.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Lionel wrote:

> Hola Joe !
> You cannot compare LeCar with the Yugo or you haven't drive any of them.

Actually, I have. Dreadful cars. The LeCar was in the same league
driving-wise with a DAF. Real head-scratcher, too, at the time, as
Renault usually made decent cars - just so much worse than normal.

My friend in college had the only registered DAF in California. It was
a total piece. Otoh, we did have fun running it 40mph in reverse,
thanks to the CVT gearbox.

He kept joking that he was going to get a used Postal Jeep as
an upgrade. :)

>> Fiat and Renault anways made - odd cars. Heh.
>>
>
> Yes but... interesting market shares.
>

[Lionel]

Joseph Oberlander wrote:

> Lionel wrote:
>
>> Hola Joe !
>> You cannot compare LeCar with the Yugo or you haven't drive any of them.
>
>
> Actually, I have. Dreadful cars. The LeCar was in the same league
> driving-wise with a DAF. Real head-scratcher, too, at the time, as
> Renault usually made decent cars - just so much worse than normal.
>
> My friend in college had the only registered DAF in California. It was
> a total piece. Otoh, we did have fun running it 40mph in reverse,
> thanks to the CVT gearbox.
>
> He kept joking that he was going to get a used Postal Jeep as
> an upgrade. :)
>
>>> Fiat and Renault anways made - odd cars. Heh.
>>>
>>
>> Yes but... interesting market shares.
>>
>
Are we speaking about LeCar from Renault ?
http://www.kevingardiner.com/renault.html
This one ?
I know the DAF, I know the Yugo... Sincerely you cannot compare.
Sorry but if you drive on a small turning road *you* can be easily 20 to
25 seconde/km faster with the Renault.

[Lionel]

Lionel wrote:

> Joseph Oberlander wrote:
>
>> Lionel wrote:
>>
>>> Hola Joe !
>>> You cannot compare LeCar with the Yugo or you haven't drive any of them.
>>
>>
>>
>> Actually, I have. Dreadful cars. The LeCar was in the same league
>> driving-wise with a DAF. Real head-scratcher, too, at the time, as
>> Renault usually made decent cars - just so much worse than normal.
>>
>> My friend in college had the only registered DAF in California. It was
>> a total piece. Otoh, we did have fun running it 40mph in reverse,
>> thanks to the CVT gearbox.
>>
>> He kept joking that he was going to get a used Postal Jeep as
>> an upgrade. :)
>>
>>>> Fiat and Renault anways made - odd cars. Heh.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes but... interesting market shares.
>>>
>>
> Are we speaking about LeCar from Renault ?
> http://www.kevingardiner.com/renault.html
> This one ?
> I know the DAF, I know the Yugo... Sincerely you cannot compare.
> Sorry but if you drive on a small turning road *you* can be easily 20 to
> 25 seconde/km faster with the Renault.
>
Ooops, sorry : 10 to 15 secondes/km. ;-)

[Joseph Oberlander]

Lionel wrote:

> Are we speaking about LeCar from Renault ?
> http://www.kevingardiner.com/renault.html
> This one ?
> I know the DAF, I know the Yugo... Sincerely you cannot compare.
> Sorry but if you drive on a small turning road *you* can be easily 20 to
> 25 seconde/km faster with the Renault.

Yes, that one. The other Renaults are actually pretty decent
quality-wise, but the LeCar - very unpopular.

[Lionel]

Joseph Oberlander wrote:
> Lionel wrote:
>
>> Are we speaking about LeCar from Renault ?
>> http://www.kevingardiner.com/renault.html
>> This one ?
>> I know the DAF, I know the Yugo... Sincerely you cannot compare.
>> Sorry but if you drive on a small turning road *you* can be easily 20
>> to 25 seconde/km faster with the Renault.
>
>
> Yes, that one. The other Renaults are actually pretty decent
> quality-wise, but the LeCar - very unpopular.
>
Ok I'm agree with you, it was far to be a perfect car but you cannot
compare it to Yugo or DAF in term of performance and security.
Note this is the first car I've ever driven.

[S888Wheel]

>> Arny said
>>
>>>
>>>> Given that figurative pipe bombs in the mail are something you're
>>>> now bragging about sockpuppet Wheel, I can see why you expect them
>>>> of me. No, I'll pursue my legal recourse against you, as promised.
>>

I said

>
>> Well Arny, you've had the summons for a day now. So are you going to
>> lay down and wait for a default judgement and bug the postmaster as
>> you "promised?"

Arny said

>
>Why would I bug the postmaster?
>

You said you were going to go after me for mail fraud.

You have had the summons for two days now and you have made no comment. I guess
you have figured out that it is quite real despite all of your wild
speculation. You should have done the right thing when it was simple and would
have cost you nothing.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>>> Arny said
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Given that figurative pipe bombs in the mail are something you're
>>>>> now bragging about sockpuppet Wheel, I can see why you expect them
>>>>> of me. No, I'll pursue my legal recourse against you, as
>>>>> promised.
>>>
>
> I said
>
>>
>>> Well Arny, you've had the summons for a day now. So are you going to
>>> lay down and wait for a default judgement (sic) and bug the postmaster
as
>>> you "promised?"
>
> Arny said
>
>>
>> Why would I bug the postmaster?

> You said you were going to go after me for mail fraud.

Why would that constitute bugging the postmaster?

> You have had the summons for two days now and you have made no
> comment.

Why would I comment about it in public?

>I guess you have figured out that it is quite real despite
> all of your wild speculation.

My fault is thinking that people have more brains than they actually have.

>You should have done the right thing
> when it was simple and would have cost you nothing.

It's still going to cost me a lot less than you. True at this instant, the
rest will be seen in time.

;-)

[S888Wheel]

>>>> Arny said
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Given that figurative pipe bombs in the mail are something you're
>>>>>> now bragging about sockpuppet Wheel, I can see why you expect them
>>>>>> of me. No, I'll pursue my legal recourse against you, as
>>>>>> promised.

>
>> I said
>>
>>>
>>>> Well Arny, you've had the summons for a day now. So are you going to
>>>> lay down and wait for a default judgement (sic) and bug the postmaster
>as
>>>> you "promised?"

>
>> Arny said
>>
>>>
>>> Why would I bug the postmaster?
>

I said

>
>> You said you were going to go after me for mail fraud.

Arny said

>
>Why would that constitute bugging the postmaster?

I didn't realize I would have to walk you through it but any claims of mail
fraud are handled through the postmaster. Any claim of mail fraud against me by
you for simply sending you letters regarding this lawsuit would be a frivolous
claim. I am guessing that the postmaster may be bugged by obvious frivolous
claims of mail fraud.

I said

>
>> You have had the summons for two days now and you have made no
>> comment.

Arny said

>
>Why would I comment about it in public?
>

You were quite happy to do so before you got the summons. Why the change of
attitude?

I said

>
>>I guess you have figured out that it is quite real despite
>> all of your wild speculation.

Arny said

>
>My fault is thinking that people have more brains than they actually have.
>

No. Your fault is for libeling me then refusing to do the decent reasonable
thing by admitting the libel, retracting the libel and apologizing for it as I
asked. I told you I would sue you if you didn't.

I said

>
>>You should have done the right thing
>> when it was simple and would have cost you nothing.

Arny said

>
>It's still going to cost me a lot less than you. True at this instant, the
>rest will be seen in time.

It was never my intention to make this expensive for you. You chose that
course. We will see who pays for this.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message


> It was never my intention to make this expensive for you.

LOL!

>You chose that course.

Yet another childish troll who can't take responsibility for his own
actions. "Arny made me do it".

>We will see who pays for this.

You already have, unless you're getting a major discount at the courthouse.
Do they give a quantity discount for vanity litigation in large volumes?

[Joseph Oberlander]

Lionel wrote:

> Ok I'm agree with you, it was far to be a perfect car but you cannot
> compare it to Yugo or DAF in term of performance and security.
> Note this is the first car I've ever driven.
>

So - what would be the worst car ever made, then?

[Lionel]

Joseph Oberlander wrote:
> Lionel wrote:
>
>> Ok I'm agree with you, it was far to be a perfect car but you cannot
>> compare it to Yugo or DAF in term of performance and security.
>> Note this is the first car I've ever driven.
>>
>
> So - what would be the worst car ever made, then?
>
>
What would be the worst speaker ever made ? ;-)
Have you an answer to the above question ? I guess no.

Depends on what you need and how much money you are ready to spend, no ?

If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
small mountain roads around my home-town...
I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)

So, what is the worst car ever made ?

[Joseph Oberlander]

Lionel wrote:

> If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
> small mountain roads around my home-town...
> I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
> 3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
> descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
>
> So, what is the worst car ever made ?
>

I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )

[Lionel]

Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 05:15:30 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
>,
et> a écrit :

>Lionel wrote:
>
>> If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
>> small mountain roads around my home-town...
>> I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
>> 3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
>> descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
>>
>> So, what is the worst car ever made ?
>>
>
>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )

I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.
We have had in France a Citroën call the "2 CV" which is also an
intersting specimen, but a very , engaging , pleasing one.
I thing the Traban will be *my* addition to the list.

[dave weil]

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:20:33 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 05:15:30 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
>,
et> a écrit :
>
>>Lionel wrote:
>>
>>> If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
>>> small mountain roads around my home-town...
>>> I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
>>> 3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
>>> descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
>>>
>>> So, what is the worst car ever made ?
>>>
>>
>>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
>>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )
>
>I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.
>We have had in France a Citroën call the "2 CV" which is also an
>intersting specimen, but a very , engaging , pleasing one.
>I thing the Traban will be *my* addition to the list.

You mean Trabant, right? It certainly ranks high, as does the Lada.
And the Trabant is a 2 cycle engine, right?

The 2CV should *not* be mentioned anywhere *near* a list of the worst
cars ever.

[dave weil]

On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:20:33 +0200, Lionel >
wrote:

>Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 05:15:30 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
>,
et> a écrit :
>
>>Lionel wrote:
>>
>>> If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
>>> small mountain roads around my home-town...
>>> I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
>>> 3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
>>> descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
>>>
>>> So, what is the worst car ever made ?
>>>
>>
>>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
>>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )
>
>I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.
>We have had in France a Citroën call the "2 CV" which is also an
>intersting specimen, but a very , engaging , pleasing one.
>I thing the Traban will be *my* addition to the list.

I meant to add that in Germany, we called the 2CV "Ente", which means
"Duck". It was an affectionate nickname.

[Lionel]

dave weil wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:20:33 +0200, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 05:15:30 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
>,
et> a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>Lionel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
>>>>small mountain roads around my home-town...
>>>>I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
>>>>3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
>>>>descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
>>>>
>>>>So, what is the worst car ever made ?
>>>>
>>>
>>>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
>>>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )
>>
>>I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.
>>We have had in France a Citroën call the "2 CV" which is also an
>>intersting specimen, but a very , engaging , pleasing one.
>>I thing the Traban will be *my* addition to the list.
>
>
> You mean Trabant, right? It certainly ranks high, as does the Lada.
> And the Trabant is a 2 cycle engine, right?

Perhaps I don't know about engine. I just remembered the first we have
seen on french roads by the early 90s.
Note that I have to be gently ironical because this car have an *History*.
>
> The 2CV should *not* be mentioned anywhere *near* a list of the worst
> cars ever.

[Lionel]

dave weil wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 11:20:33 +0200, Lionel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 05:15:30 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
>,
et> a écrit :
>>
>>
>>>Lionel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
>>>>small mountain roads around my home-town...
>>>>I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
>>>>3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
>>>>descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
>>>>
>>>>So, what is the worst car ever made ?
>>>>
>>>
>>>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
>>>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )
>>
>>I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.
>>We have had in France a Citroën call the "2 CV" which is also an
>>intersting specimen, but a very , engaging , pleasing one.
>>I thing the Traban will be *my* addition to the list.
>
>
> I meant to add that in Germany, we called the 2CV "Ente", which means
> "Duck". It was an affectionate nickname.

I appreciate : this was my wife's first car and I was an hitchhiker ;-)
"souvenirs, souvenirs..."

[S888Wheel]

I said

>
>> It was never my intention to make this expensive for you.
>

Arny said

>
>LOL!

Strange what you find funny.


I said

>
>>You chose that course.

Arny said

>
>Yet another childish troll who can't take responsibility for his own
>actions. "Arny made me do it".

No Arny that wasn't what i meant. I noticed you deleted the point you now wish
to avoid. Here is what you deleted...
No. Your fault is for libeling me then refusing to do the decent reasonable
thing by admitting the libel, retracting the libel and apologizing for it as I
asked. I told you I would sue you if you didn't.

I am not saying you made me sue you I am saying you had an option that would
have prevented it. You chose the course Arny.

I said

>
>>We will see who pays for this.
>

Arny said

>
>You already have, unless you're getting a major discount at the courthouse.
>Do they give a quantity discount for vanity litigation in large volumes?

Arny do you know what tense the word "will" is?

You deleted the following from my post in your response...


I didn't realize I would have to walk you through it but any claims of mail
fraud are handled through the postmaster. Any claim of mail fraud against me by
you for simply sending you letters regarding this lawsuit would be a frivolous
claim. I am guessing that the postmaster may be bugged by obvious frivolous
claims of mail fraud.


I guess you don't want to talk about your silly claims of mail fraud.
Understandable.

>
>Why would I comment about it in public?
>

You were quite happy to do so before you got the summons. Why the change of
attitude?


I can understand why you don't want to talk about it.

[Joseph Oberlander]

Lionel wrote:

> Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 05:15:30 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> >,
> et> a écrit :
>
>
>>Lionel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
>>>small mountain roads around my home-town...
>>>I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
>>>3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
>>>descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
>>>
>>>So, what is the worst car ever made ?
>>>
>>
>>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
>>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )
>
>
> I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.

Oh - I forgot that one. Nasty.

[MiNE 109]

In article t>,
Joseph Oberlander > wrote:

> Lionel wrote:
>
> > Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 05:15:30 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> > >,
> > et> a écrit :
> >
> >
> >>Lionel wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
> >>>small mountain roads around my home-town...
> >>>I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
> >>>3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
> >>>descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
> >>>
> >>>So, what is the worst car ever made ?
> >>>
> >>
> >>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
> >>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )
> >
> >
> > I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.
>
> Oh - I forgot that one. Nasty.

Or the Czech Skoda. Here's a page that translates "skoda" into English:

http://tinyurl.com/qlg9

Stephen

[Joseph Oberlander]

MiNE 109 wrote:

>>>>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
>>>>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.
>>
>>Oh - I forgot that one. Nasty.
>
>
> Or the Czech Skoda. Here's a page that translates "skoda" into English:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/qlg9

LMFAO. Really. Oh man - that's a good laugh.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

>>
>> Why would I comment about it in public?

> You were quite happy to do so before you got the summons. Why the
> change of attitude?

> I can understand why you don't want to talk about it.

That's why I've been talking about it today.

LOL!

[Lionel]

MiNE 109 wrote:
> In article t>,
> Joseph Oberlander > wrote:
>
>
>>Lionel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 05:15:30 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
>,
et> a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Lionel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on the
>>>>>small mountain roads around my home-town...
>>>>>I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2 or
>>>>>3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
>>>>>descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
>>>>>
>>>>>So, what is the worst car ever made ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
>>>>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list ;) )
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.
>>
>>Oh - I forgot that one. Nasty.
>
>
> Or the Czech Skoda. Here's a page that translates "skoda" into English:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/qlg9
>
> Stephen

I forgot this one also. I have worked in Tcheque Republic and they have
about 1000 very funny jokes about the Skoda and its chronic failures. ;-)

[bud]

"Lionel" > wrote

> I forgot this one also. I have worked in Tcheque Republic and they have
> about 1000 very funny jokes about the Skoda and its chronic failures. ;-)

Don't forget about the Dacia. A Romanian copy of the old Renault12. As the
story goes, Renault sold all of its preWW2 lines and machinery to a company
in Romania and the Dacia car was born.
It was okay until it got wet, and after that it only took months for the
electrical systems to deteriorate. It was also prone to clutch, transmission
and brake problems.

A friend of mine had one and he was lucky to have it last two years. Of
course, that was with a $3500 rebuild of most of the major parts halfway
through the first year. Considering he only paid $5000 for it new, it's no
wonder Dacia never managed to survive much more than a handful of years in
the North American market.

Romanian ingenuity...gotta love it.

[George M. Middius]

bud said:

> Don't forget about the Dacia. A Romanian copy of the old Renault12. As the
> story goes, Renault sold all of its preWW2 lines and machinery to a company
> in Romania and the Dacia car was born.
> It was okay until it got wet, and after that it only took months for the
> electrical systems to deteriorate. It was also prone to clutch, transmission
> and brake problems.

So Krooger *was* an automotive engineer once. And all this time I
assumed he was lying again.

[Lionel]

bud wrote:
> "Lionel" > wrote
>
>
>>I forgot this one also. I have worked in Tcheque Republic and they have
>>about 1000 very funny jokes about the Skoda and its chronic failures. ;-)
>
>
> Don't forget about the Dacia. A Romanian copy of the old Renault12. As the
> story goes, Renault sold all of its preWW2 lines and machinery to a company
> in Romania and the Dacia car was born.
> It was okay until it got wet, and after that it only took months for the
> electrical systems to deteriorate. It was also prone to clutch, transmission
> and brake problems.
>
> A friend of mine had one and he was lucky to have it last two years. Of
> course, that was with a $3500 rebuild of most of the major parts halfway
> through the first year. Considering he only paid $5000 for it new, it's no
> wonder Dacia never managed to survive much more than a handful of years in
> the North American market.
>
> Romanian ingenuity...gotta love it.
>
>
I've heard about it and seen some pictures...
I can understand because the R12 in France had a lot of problem with
rust... After 6-7 years the body and the frame are seriously corroded. I
have seen more than once R12 with the "bottom" on the road. ;-)

[Lionel]

George M. Middius wrote:
>
> bud said:
>
>
>>Don't forget about the Dacia. A Romanian copy of the old Renault12. As the
>>story goes, Renault sold all of its preWW2 lines and machinery to a company
>>in Romania and the Dacia car was born.
>>It was okay until it got wet, and after that it only took months for the
>>electrical systems to deteriorate. It was also prone to clutch, transmission
>>and brake problems.
>
>
> So Krooger *was* an automotive engineer once. And all this time I
> assumed he was lying again.
>
>
Have you any experience with cars to share George ?
I hope you will be more "accurate" than in audio. ;-)

[S888Wheel]

Arny said

>
>>> Why would I comment about it in public?

I said

>
>> You were quite happy to do so before you got the summons. Why the
>> change of attitude?
>
>> I can understand why you don't want to talk about it.

Arny said

>
>That's why I've been talking about it today.
>
>LOL!
>

LOL? Are you even aware of what you have said? " Why would I comment about it
in public?"

Your foot, your mouth. I guess you still haven't talked to a real lawyer yet. I
can't imagine that a real lawyer would want you posting admissions to the libel
cited in the lawsuit. Maybe you have but you just can't control yourself.

[Sockpuppet Yustabe]

"bud" > wrote in message
. cable.rogers.com...
>
> "Lionel" > wrote
>
> > I forgot this one also. I have worked in Tcheque Republic and they have
> > about 1000 very funny jokes about the Skoda and its chronic failures.
;-)
>
> Don't forget about the Dacia. A Romanian copy of the old Renault12. As the
> story goes, Renault sold all of its preWW2 lines and machinery to a
company
> in Romania and the Dacia car was born.
> It was okay until it got wet, and after that it only took months for the
> electrical systems to deteriorate. It was also prone to clutch,
transmission
> and brake problems.
>
> A friend of mine had one and he was lucky to have it last two years. Of
> course, that was with a $3500 rebuild of most of the major parts halfway
> through the first year. Considering he only paid $5000 for it new, it's no
> wonder Dacia never managed to survive much more than a handful of years in
> the North American market.
>
> Romanian ingenuity...gotta love it.
>

I just got back from Romania.
The roads are saturated with older Dacias, still chugging away.
They don't look or sound that bad.
Much better that Trabats.




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[marky]

The original chevy vega with all aluminum cylinders was pretty bad....also,
the 70's Ford Fiesta - almost undriveable off the lot.
"Lionel" > wrote in message
...
> MiNE 109 wrote:
> > In article t>,
> > Joseph Oberlander > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Lionel wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Le Sat, 11 Oct 2003 05:15:30 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> >,
> et> a écrit :
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Lionel wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>If you like emotions for example you can have a lot of pleasure on
the
> >>>>>small mountain roads around my home-town...
> >>>>>I bet you that in a descent with a LeCar I would go faster at least 2
or
> >>>>>3 second/km than you with a big 5 liters US car. I guess that if the
> >>>>>descent is more than 5 km you would finish in the ravine. :o)
> >>>>>
> >>>>>So, what is the worst car ever made ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>I honestly don't know. The DAF was horrendous, and so was the Yugo.
> >>>>Any other candidates that you like?(DAF was my addition to the list
;) )
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I'm not sure you know the first Lada or the Traban.
> >>
> >>Oh - I forgot that one. Nasty.
> >
> >
> > Or the Czech Skoda. Here's a page that translates "skoda" into English:
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/qlg9
> >
> > Stephen
>
> I forgot this one also. I have worked in Tcheque Republic and they have
> about 1000 very funny jokes about the Skoda and its chronic failures. ;-)
>

[Joseph Oberlander]

marky wrote:

> The original chevy vega with all aluminum cylinders was pretty bad....also,
> the 70's Ford Fiesta - almost undriveable off the lot.

Trust us. The Skoda and Daf made the Fiesta look like a Mercedes.
Literally - no joke.

[Joseph Oberlander]

marky wrote:

> The original chevy vega with all aluminum cylinders was pretty bad....also,
> the 70's Ford Fiesta - almost undriveable off the lot.

http://www.dafclub.nl/modellen/index.php

I think the 33 second 0-80km/h time speaks for itself. The better
later models were 20 seconds, and the ungodly powerful 4 cylinder DAF 55
had a 12 second rating.

They rusted, they were like your worst VW bug horror story when
they were running properly, and like a rusty lawnmower when they
wwere not. 2 cylinders, CVT, and

Still, they did carry more people than a crummy little Isetta.

[dave weil]

On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 02:56:44 GMT, Joseph Oberlander
> wrote:

>marky wrote:
>
>> The original chevy vega with all aluminum cylinders was pretty bad....also,
>> the 70's Ford Fiesta - almost undriveable off the lot.
>
>http://www.dafclub.nl/modellen/index.php
>
>I think the 33 second 0-80km/h time speaks for itself. The better
>later models were 20 seconds, and the ungodly powerful 4 cylinder DAF 55
>had a 12 second rating.
>
>They rusted, they were like your worst VW bug horror story when
>they were running properly, and like a rusty lawnmower when they
>wwere not. 2 cylinders, CVT, and
>
>Still, they did carry more people than a crummy little Isetta.

Of course, Alfa proved that you didn't have to let a little rust (or,
more precisely, a *lot* of rust) stand in your way of a great driving
experience.

[Joseph Oberlander]

dave weil wrote:

>
> Of course, Alfa proved that you didn't have to let a little rust (or,
> more precisely, a *lot* of rust) stand in your way of a great driving
> experience.

Yeah, I actually have a soft spot in my heart for those things.

MGs are kind of simmilar - underappreciated, but a blast to drive
when they are running.

[Arny Krueger]

"S888Wheel" > wrote in message

> Arny said
>
>>
>>>> Why would I comment about it in public?
>
> I said
>
>>
>>> You were quite happy to do so before you got the summons. Why the
>>> change of attitude?
>>
>>> I can understand why you don't want to talk about it.
>
> Arny said
>
>>
>> That's why I've been talking about it today.
>>
>> LOL!
>>
>
> LOL? Are you even aware of what you have said? " Why would I comment
> about it in public?"

Nobody answered that question, right?

You really ought to watch the action around here a little more carefully,
sockpuppet wheel.

[pyjamarama]

George M. Middius > wrote in message >...
> bud said:
>
> > Don't forget about the Dacia. A Romanian copy of the old Renault12. As the
> > story goes, Renault sold all of its preWW2 lines and machinery to a company
> > in Romania and the Dacia car was born.
> > It was okay until it got wet, and after that it only took months for the
> > electrical systems to deteriorate. It was also prone to clutch, transmission
> > and brake problems.
>
> So Krooger *was* an automotive engineer once. And all this time I
> assumed he was lying again.

Hey look -- even in a non-audio post Middiot can't quell his Arny obsession.

It must be love.

Truly pathetic.

[Lorne Fraser]

I need info on Sphis Audioproduct model lbx250 studio monitors please.

Lorne
"dave weil" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 4 Oct 2003 16:51:25 -0400, "Bob Morein" >
> wrote:
>
> >But in the last sentence of your post, you imply that Greg wanted the
> >speakers back.
>
> No, I said that I boxed the speakers up and was waiting for him to
> pick them up.
>
> Nobody seemes to have actaully read what i wrote.
>
> But what's new around here?